| ------------------------------
|
| Date: Wed, 30 Jun 93 9:00:40 CDT
| From: rkriggs@riggs.b30.ingr.com (Kevin Riggs)
| Subject: 2.5l Triumph vs. 1.8l MG
|
| Scott Fisher #1 says,
|
| > D Production Triumph into E Production because it takes a
| > 6-cylinder, 2.5-liter Triumph to beat a 4-cylinder, 1.8-liter MG.
|
Kevin Riggs responds
| That's why I drive a TR6, Scott. I forget, why was it you said you like
| MGs?
I pour fuel on the fire by pointing out: 8^)
Experience tells us that 2.2 liter, 2 liter and even 1.5 liter Triumphs
have also been known to finnish ahead of MGBs.
(eg Hardy Prentiss who won national champ in E-prod in a TR3)
/dick
-----------------
| From: (Roger Garnett)
| Subject: Re: Triumph vs. MG
|
|
| Is it marque wars time? :-) So why is it that this 2.5 Litre TR6,
| designed around 1970, spec's in with almost the same acceleration and top
| speed as the 4 cylinder MGB designed around 1960?
This is, I'm sure, a retorical question in Rogers part. (He knows about
1970s smog laws and what they did to the performance of most cars compared to
their
1960s modles)
The TR6 was actually designed in the mid 1960s as the TR5 which was a very fast
car.
I doubt you would want to compare the performance of a TR5 to any MG with fewer
then
8 cylinders.
(And what about having
| to replace all those U-Joints every other year?)
well you got us there.
You're just mad cuz
| people walk by your TR and say intelligent things like "Oh, is that an
| MG?
Actually the last time some one mistook my TR3 it was for a AC Cobra.
Yawn...... Scratch........ well enough mud slinging for today...
BTW.. anyone got an MG they would like to drag race against one of my
Triumphs?????? HMMM ??? 8^)
regards to all/dick
|