6pack
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250

To: Ashford Little <70tr6@comcast.net>
Subject: Re: [6pack] Canada - TR5 or TR250
From: Michael Porter <mdporter@dfn.com>
Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2013 14:06:46 -0700
Cc: 6pack@autox.team.net
Delivered-to: mharc@autox.team.net
Delivered-to: 6pack@autox.team.net
References: <1356563886.70654.YahooMailNeo@web163501.mail.gq1.yahoo.com> <56C5FB52-8598-4594-B6B2-49056894BA1C@lbcs.ca> <010201cdef6c$fc1937f0$f44ba7d0$@com> <B447AC95-4386-4582-8705-3D92A6D6D0DE@lbcs.ca> <CAO2WPFZZDHX_vfiYcsQLESf_17qNGz1cuSqQQrUPV49fxAWtQQ@mail.gmail.com> <6A98954B-6C40-4EC5-8C5C-EC0C10156D66@rogers.com> <50F039EE.9060401@pobox.com> <677B3705-0CA1-4A19-8677-87D74DB0AF1A@rogers.com> <50F03F83.8020301@pobox.com> <027b01cdf039$827525d0$875f7170$@com> <1A166899-5F76-42B0-9368-187751DF3A9E@comcast.net>
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0
On 1/11/2013 1:31 PM, Ashford Little wrote:
> I heard that the whole emissions argument was "the story" but that the real
> reason was cost.  The PI system costs more and they didn't think us Yanks
> would pay for the added cost as PI wasn't common at the time.  I think Mike
> Cook might have said this.  Then again, I might be wrong.
>

IIRC, the plan was to introduce PI as a means of meeting the 1968 US 
emissions standards, but the development costs mounted (partly because 
Lucas specified individual runner throttling and some other new 
proprietary parts, which really drove up unit pricing and time to 
delivery).  There was also some preliminary rally testing done that 
indicated that the lack of barometric mixture control made performance 
problematic in a lot of US locations.  When it was found at a late stage 
of development that Stromberg could meet emissions at a lower cost than 
PI, that pretty much sealed the deal for the larger US market.

As for emissions standards, they may be comparable to the US standards 
now (or even tighter), but that simply wasn't the case in 1968. Triumph 
at the time was concerned about meeting US standards, which were quite 
new to both them and the American manufacturers. The British and 
European standards were almost non-existent then, which is why the the 
PI engines were first equipped with a camshaft with considerably more 
overlap than the US engine and could make a rated 150 hp. Nor did fuel 
quality have much to do with it (there's nothing intrinsically better 
about European fuel blending). At the time of introduction, pump gas of 
~ 100 octane was available (remember Sunoco 260?).  It was only when 
tetraethyl lead began to be phased out in the `80s that octane ratings 
dropped (Europe was well behind the US in that change, which might 
contribute to the belief that European fuel was superior).


Cheers.

-- 


Michael Porter
Roswell, NM


Never let anyone drive you crazy when you know it's within walking distance....

________________________________________

6pack@autox.team.net

Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/6pack/mharc@autox.team.net


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>