Triumph Stag documentary, 1970.

[Touring442]

In the 50th year of our favourite throbbing V8: What a terrible missed opportunity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lWWErDU09JU

[j4r4lly]

This is fascinating.......... and a real nostalgia trip.

Always liked the Triumph Stag.

[Touring442]

They should have shifted 150'000 of these over 10 years. Bloody tragic.

[xjsracer44]

Thanks for posting that link, what a missed opportunity.

[2xChevrons]

Oof...the pathos of the Coventry Evening Telegraph chap at the end saying how they're certain to meet their target of 10,000 sales per year...when they shifted 25,000 in seven!

An all-too typical case of Triumph's reach exceeding its grasp.

[Wacky Racer]

xjsracer44 said:

Thanks for posting that link, what a missed opportunity.

This.

Pity the engine was beset by problems.

Should have put the Buick/Rover V8 in.

[sinbaddio]

Looking forward to watching this later - thanks for sharing!

[2xChevrons]

Wacky Racer said:

This.

Pity the engine was beset by problems.

Should have put the Buick/Rover V8 in.

That was never on the cards.

The Stag (and its engine) were in development before Leyland purchased Rover in 1966 (thus bringing Rover and Triumph under the same roof) - the Stag project was started in 1964, the Triumph V8 began development in early 1965 and the Stag was signed off for a full development project in June 1966. The Leyland takeover didn't begin proceedings until December of that year and wasn't formalised until early 1967. The Rover V8 didn't enter production until the summer of 1967, a year after the Stag/V8 project gathered full steam at Triumph.

More importantly, there was not sufficient production of Rover V8s to meet the projected demand for the Stag, even if Triumph and Rover had collaborated. All Rover V8 production (which could not be expanded since it was already taking up all of the capacity at the Acocks Green engine plant) was being taken by Rover cars, and especially the Range Rover which was an unprecedented success - there were long waiting lists for the Range Rover throughout the 1970s and that was because there weren't enough engines for them. With Triumph anticipating selling at least 10,000 Stags per year, the RV8 simply couldn't be used.

Also, the TV8 was, on paper, a much superior engine to the rather old-fashioned pushrod RV8. The issue was that Triumph couldn't build what was put down on paper (which is what I meant by its reach exceeding its grasp). Had Triumph been able to build engines in quantity to the correct standards, and then teach its dealers how to maintain and service them properly, most of the issues that killed the Stag in the market wouldn't have been so savage, regardless of the engine's inherent design weaknesses.

Ironically Rover probably could have supplied the 3000-odd engines per year that represented Triumph's actual Stag sales...but with the RV8 in place it would probably have sold in greater numbers, which Rover then wouldn't have been able to supply!

So a hypothetical RV8-powered Stag goes one of two ways; either, like the Range Rover, the lack of supply for the Stag leads to it gaining an air of exclusivity and affluence far above its intended station or, like the MGB GT V8, British Leyland just can the model altogether because it can't be shifted in sufficient quanitites to make it worthwhile, latent demand or not.

[hilly10]

What a chance missed, it was a lovely looking car and still is.

[TR4man]

I’ve saved this to watch at the weekend. Many thanks for highlighting it.

I have many fond memories of my Stag which I owned for six years. It took us on tours around the Europe to Flanders, Reims, Spa, and through Germany, Luxembourg and France. We even took it over to Jersey on one occasion. It was a brilliant GT car as is probably the one car I’d buy back in an instant.

It was to my eyes such a beautiful looking car too.

[Touring442]

They could be bad, but lots of cars sold despite a terrible reputation; Alfasuds fell to bits but buyers came back for more on promises of 'we've fixed that now'. I know a couple of folk who had Stags that were completely reliable - honest!

The Triumph V8 is a lovely thing when it works, much nicer than the Rover V8.

I never liked the 'legs askew' driving position of the Stag and suspect that put off a lot of buyers.

[Wacky Racer]

2xChevrons said:

Wacky Racer said:

This.

Pity the engine was beset by problems.

Should have put the Buick/Rover V8 in.

[snip]

That was never on the cards.

Thanks for that, but Rover must have had enough over to supply Morgan for the Plus 8, which made it's debut in 1968, although I realise we are only talking small volumes. The power output was pretty abysmal for a 3.5 litre motor. (I had a 1973 plus 8)

[HealeyV8]

Wacky Racer said:

Thanks for that, but Rover must have had enough over to supply Morgan for the Plus 8, which made it's debut in 1968, although I realise we are only talking small volumes. The power output was pretty abysmal for a 3.5 litre motor. (I had a 1973 plus 8)

Not ability to supply but internal politics. Triumph taking Rover parts, not on my watch?

[2xChevrons]

Wacky Racer said:

Thanks for that, but Rover must have had enough over to supply Morgan for the Plus 8, which made it's debut in 1968, although I realise we are only talking small volumes. The power output was pretty abysmal for a 3.5 litre motor. (I had a 1973 plus 8)

The Plus 8 only represented about 100-200 cars per year. Which was a rather different prospect to hypothetically supplying 10,000-15,000 engines to Triumph for the Stag. In context, that's more than the number of Range Rover made each year (which, as mentioned, was much greater than Rover anticipated). Supplying Rover's needs and the Stag would require increasing V8 production by around 30%, which simply wasn't possible. It was the unexcepted demand for Range Rovers and the Land Rover 101 orders which restricted V8 availability.

Of course, you could argue that BL should have spent the money on increasing RV8 production to clear the backlog of Range Rover orders and provide a better power unit for the Stag, but all these issues were set in motion before BL was formed and before Rover and Triumph were brought together. BL's plan for a Stag replacement (the Lynx) did use the RV8.

Fun fact: Peter Morgan originally wanted to use the Triumph V8 in the Plus 8; it was known that Triumph were working on a V8 before Rover even stumbled over the ex-Buick unit. The Triumph engine was physically smaller than the Rover one, was a more modern design and made more power for its size. Delays to the Triumph engine project (ditching fuel injection for carbs and increasing it from a 2.5- to a 3.0-litre unit) and Triumph's uncertainty about having surplus engines, what with expected buoyant Stag sales and then fitting their new V8 to the Triumph 2000 as well, caused Morgan to approach Rover instead and find a way of (just about) shoehorning the Rover unit into the Morgan. In fact Morgan got a deal to use the RV8 before that engine actually entered production, before Rover had finished the project to put the engine in the P6 and before the Range Rover had even been finally signed off. I suspect that had Morgan come along a year or so later they may have been rebuffed by Rover as well.

HealeyV8 said:

Not ability to supply but internal politics. Triumph taking Rover parts, not on my watch?

It really wasn't - even ignoring the hypothetical lack of RV8s, the Stag and its engine were essentially done and dusted from a design and investment standpoint before Rover and Triumph became bedfellows.

[Lotobear]

Dustin Hoffman drove one in the original Straw Dogs.

...nice looking car and the best sounding V8 there is

[a8hex]

Wacky Racer said:

Thanks for that, but Rover ... The power output was pretty abysmal for a 3.5 litre motor. (I had a 1973 plus 8)

Yes, the spec for the Lynx was making less power from the 3.5L than the planned power from the Sprint's 2L, of course they couldn't build that properly either and had to down rate it for production. The V8 had a lot more low down torque.

[Touring442]

The slant four from which the Stag V8 came was done and dusted in late 1966. It was first used in the 1967 Saab 99 in 1709 cc form. Saab developed that into the fuel injection 1850 with Bosch D Jet and 95 bhp. Eventually, Saab redesigned the engine into the 'B' Series motor.
Saab fitted the original 1.7 with Bosch D and it did not far off 90 bhp on a good day. The timing chains used on these and Stags were made by Reynolds who didn't turn out rubbish. The Stag's chains weren't even that long compared to a Maxi E Series so there was something not quite right with either lubrication or tensioning. The Hot Ticket now is JWIS chains from Germany, that hotbed of quality. You know, like the BMW N47 chain.

The angled head studs were not the bad idea that is often purported. Well, not until you have to take the heads off.

If Mercedes had built it, it would have been a very good engine.

[2xChevrons]

Touring442 said:

who didn't turn out rubbish. The Stag's chains weren't even that long compared to a Maxi E Series so there was something not quite right with either lubrication or tensioning. The Hot Ticket now is JWIS chains from Germany, that hotbed of quality. You know, like the BMW N47 chain.

The angled head studs were not the bad idea that is often purported. Well, not until you have to take the heads off.

If Mercedes had built it, it would have been a very good engine.

Exactly. Rather like the Rover K-Series, the TV8 has many good qualities and lots of weaknesses that can only be aleviated by very high manufacturing, assembly and QC standards, plus a suitably correct and rigorous servicing schedule. The TV8, unfortunately, received the exact opposite of this. The fact that the engine is generally fine these days when in the hands of more considerate owners and more knowledgeable specialists, not to mention the work of Tony Hart and his racing Stags, speaks volumes.

Incidentally I've heard from a couple of Stag specialists that the JWIS chains don't last significantly longer than the original-spec ones and have the problem that they don't stretch appreciably before they fail, while the OEM chains at least have the decency to set up a horrendous racket as they wear before failure becomes a possibility.

[Touring442]

JWIS stuff, like Bosch etc isn't what it was. In 1979, a JWIS chain was a superb thing Made In West Germany. Nobody will pay for 1979 quality any more which is why modern chains are so poor.

[neutral 3]

Fascinating piece of film, but OMG, what on earth were they on by lumbering the Stag with that poorly engineered, piece of crap engine !! Like the disastrous 1958 Series 1 Austin Gipsy, the Stags engine simply did not have enough development time put into it. But the Stag should have had the Buick / Rover V-8 from the start. This superb engine was very durable, light, very under stressed and already well proven in the 3500 Rover and of course the Range Rover.
This engine went on to be enlarged to 5 Litres for the Griffith 500 and 300 hp is easily / reliably available.
The quality of steel used in all BL products then was poor, add poor priming and paint and under seal and it’s no wonder that the Stag rapidly rotted.
A pals Late Dad was a Huge Stag fan. He bought 3 brand new ones, the last being a blue S reg manual. All 3 of his Stags blew their engines, but he loved the Stag so much that he persisted with them.