triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: TR10 (really L-O-N-G response)

To: wise@VAXA.CIS.UWOSH.EDU
Subject: Re: TR10 (really L-O-N-G response)
From: Andrew Mace <amace@unix2.nysed.gov>
Date: Wed, 22 Nov 1995 12:54:07 -0800 (PST)
Cc: Scions of Stanpart <triumphs@autox.team.net>
On Tue, 21 Nov 1995 wise@VAXA.CIS.UWOSH.EDU wrote:

>         A couple of people asked about the TR10.  Although I'm no expert,
> as I understand the TR10 story it goes something like this...
>         The TR10 is a very rare (but not very valuable) Triumph that really
> isn't a Triumph at all.

Well, no and yes. The Triumph 10 (as it was always badged) or, as it was 
most often described in sales and service literature, Triumph Sedan (or 
Estate Wagon) totaled nearly 18,000 total units, according to Robson & 
Langworth's history of Triumph. Rare? No. Compare the 3,301 (?) TR3Bs, 
or 3 TRX prototypes, or.... Valuable? Not really, except as a novelty, 
although to us fanatics of the "family" side of Triumph.... ;-)

> ...By the mid-50's, the
> Triumph TR2/3 was selling like hotcakes in the US and economy cars were
> starting to come on the scene (VW Beetle, Honda, etc).
                                            ^^^^^

Not Honda, not until the late 1960s or early 1970s (Honda 600 sedans and 
coupes). However, there were lots of competitors to VW in the 1950s: Fiat, 
Renault, Simca, Vauxhall, Opel, Morris, Austin, not to mention the slightly 
more upmarket Saab, Volvo, etc., etc. 10 sales literature tended to 
focus "anonymously" on the Fiat 1100, Renault Dauphine and VW Type 1 as 
the primary competition.

> Standard had been
> producing the "Standard 10" for some time--four door sedan, 39 bhp, front
> drum brakes, three speed,
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Well, virtually nothing save the Jensen and TR3 and maybe some Chryslers
and Crosleys had disk brakes at the time. As for the three-speed, only
the first prototype Standard 8 carried such a (crash!) gearbox. 
Production always featured a four-speed with synchromesh on the top three
gears. That gearbox was basically what was to become the Herald/Spitfire
gearbox. The engine in the original Standard 8 was an 803cc unit (B/S:
58mm x 76mm). The Standard 10 unit was 948cc and virtually the same as
the Herald engine. Of course, this later evolved into the 1147, 1296 and
1493cc Spitfire unit, and (with two cylinders tacked on) the 1596, 1998
and 2498(?) sixes.

> very low gearing on the differential....

Again, the differential unit, developed, was the basis for the 
differential used in the Herald, Vitesse, GT6, Spitfire, even the early TR7.

> the very low horsepower).  It was underpowered, undergeared, underbraked,
> and undersuspended.  Not a very good car, to say the least.

Perhaps then; certainly by today's standards. But compared to its 
contemporaries, really no better, no worse.

> Standard...slapped a
> "Triumph TR10" badge on it and advertised it as a close relative to the
> TR2/3--although the two cars had absolutely nothing in common.  They sold a
> handful of the TR10s, but not very many because they were not competitive
> with anything else in their class.

The badge on the front of the car is similar to that of a TR3: the 
Shield shape, the word TRIUMPH across the bottom, but the "TR3" is 
replaced with "10" at the top.

Again, to my knowledge "TR10" was never used officially by S-T USA. It's 
unfortunate that some knowledgeable authors seem to have kept this myth 
going even as they attempt to dispel other myths. :-) And the cars did 
stack up reasonably well against their major sales competition.

  The line died off (1959?) and led to no
> offspring (unlike the proud and successful Herald --> Vitesse --> Spitfire
> --> GT6 lineage).

A typo here? True, no body bits survived (nor did the unibody theme) to 
the Herald, et.al., line. Otherwise, though, the Herald family is 
DIRECTLY descended from the 8/10 line. Also notable is that "commercial" 
(delivery van, etc.) versions of the Standard 10 were built well into 
the 1960s. And the Triumph 10 itself was sold in the U.S. into the 1960 
model year, alongside the "new" Herald (possibly due to the fact that 
there was no Herald Estate at the time?).

>         The good news is that because TR10s have virtually no value to
> collectors, you can modify them to your heart's content and not depreciate
> the (basically nonexistent) value.  So you drop in the engine (~75 bhp),
> front disc brakes and differential from a Spitfire, and you get a
> reasonably dependable, really cute little car that will actually reach 55
> mph.  [BTW, the TR10 differential used to be very popular with hill climb
> enthusiasts due to its incredibly low gearing].

There was a factory tuning kit (the usual 2 SUs, etc.) for the 10, and 
the car enjoyed some success in rallying, under the skilled driving of 
no less than Stirling Moss among others.

Then, too, there were cars based almost entirely on the mechanicals of 
the Ten, such as the Fairthorpe Electron Minor.

> [BTW again, as near as I
> can tell, pre-WWII British cars seemed to have used a naming system based
> on the horsepower per cylinder.  I think this had to do with the vehicle
> taxing system in place at the time.  So the Standard "10" had ~10
> bhp/cylinder].

I don't know if the "taxable horsepower" is directly related to 
"horsepower per cylinder"; if anyone would like to calculate the 
"treasury rating" (taxable horsepower), the RAC formula is as follows:

                  2
     (bore in mm.)  x number of cylinders
hp = ------------------------------------
                   1613

[That's cylinder bore squared, BTW]

To "get around" this tax rating situation is why so many LBC motors have 
(had?) such long strokes relative to bore size.

The "treasury rating" was long gone by the 1950s, but the naming 
convention survived for a time.

==================================================

BTW, sorry this is so long, and I don't mean to pick on Bob, but I do 
like to keep the facts straight. And I have a personal stake here as 
well. Many of you know from reading this list that my dad's first 
Triumph was a new 1959 Ten Sedan. It was that car that started my 
virtually life-long obsession with Triumphs. Sadly, it's one of the few 
Triumphs that did not stay in the family, but I do own a 1960 Ten Estate 
Wagon, which keeps the Mayflower, the Heralds and the rest of my forlorn 
S-T collection company in my barn.

Again, if the above wasn't enough for y'all, there is a Triumph 10 page 
at the VTR Web site:

http://www.sanders.com/vtr/Triumph10/Triumph10.html

Andrew Mace
10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant
Vintage Triumph Register
amace@unix2.nysed.gov




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