If that's so, why didn't the factory change the
In a nutshell.....I'm guessing that the 2A needle was the "best match" in
1964 for performance and driveability over the entire range of rpm and was
probably best suited to 1964 fuel composition (which included lead to improve
Fast forward to the 21st century and, while performance and driveability
concerns haven't changed, fuel composition certainly has and that's where more
robust (richer) needles like the 2H can help. Try the 2H needles and see if
they work well for you....I gave up stock needles many years ago and have
never regretted it. I'm using B1E needles on my TR6 Strombergs (later
needle style 175 CDs) which are quite a bit "thinner" than stock. My engine
has been extensively modified so these needles work very well but I've
fitted them on TR6 motors with lesser modifications and have gotten similar
So, you could rebuild with 2A and see how it runs then swap out the needles
for the 2H and compare - my preference would be to install the 2H and enjoy!
Delaware Valley Triumphs, Ltd.
1976 TR6 CF57822U
**************Plan your next getaway with AOL Travel. Check out Today's Hot
5 Travel Deals!
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
This list supported in part by the Vintage Triumph Register