Sorry for getting on this thread late. I've been away and am just
catching up on mail. Erik began a healthy discussion and I know several
people on the list have responded on this one. Since I own both a TR6 and an
MGB and love both of them, I feel compelled to offer my hopefully unbiased
experience/opinion.
The TR6 referred to below in Erik's test drive undoubtedly had some
serious problems with the suspension and other areas (as a previous lister
also pointed out). A stock US TR6 in good operating condition (up to factory
specs) will out accelerate a stock MGB (pre or post 75 model) by
approximately 2 seconds in a 0-60 run. Late single Stromberg MGB's are even
slower. Having said that, the difference in displacement of the TR6's 2.5
liter vs the MGB's 1.8 liter SHOULD yeild a much greater power difference
than it does. The fact that it doesn't is a disappointment. The US TR6 is
pretty well choked down to meet Federal emissions standards (by 1975 & 76,
its was choked down to 7.75 compression making it a little slower than pre
75 TR6's). The stock UK TR6 screams with 152 hp while the US TR6 has only
106. The nice thing about the TR6 engine is that it is relatively easy to
un-choke the US version to get about 145 to 150 hp without doing anything
more than putting in a mildly uprated cam and bumping the compression ratio
up to 9.5. If you want to go with webers and a header, there is even more
gain. But the torque is what you really feel in the TR6. Even the stock US
TR6 2.5 liter six has gobs of useful torque that make freeway cruising at
speed a pleasure. I love the feel of cruising at a steady 70 mph and then
punching the accelerator and feeling it pull smoothly upward to 85, 90 and
beyond. My 68 MGB beats my brains out driving at 70 mph. Definitely not a
pleasure on the highway. (I'm comparing both without overdrive. Apples to
apples.) The place where the TR6 wins hands down is just the smooth torquey
power curve of its engine (even choked down to US specs). It just feels like
it will keep pulling endlessly and does it very smoothly.
Now lets talk handling. I'd say the MGB edges out the TR6 in tight,
fast cornering. The TR6 handles fairly well with one major caveat. The TR6
is nose heavy and understeers unless some suspension modification is done to
correct it. The MGB feels more balanced in corners and seems to corner a
little better (again, comparing stock specs to stock specs). But by no means
does the TR6 six handle like an El Dorado or "rock like a boat" unless
something is very wrong (remember, just like old MG's, there are a lot of
tired, worn out TR6's out there that people don't take care of). I guess I'd
say that on a flat, smooth, tight autocross course, assuming the tires of
both cars have equal stickiness, I think the stock MGB would out corner the
stock TR6. However, on a decent sized ROAD course where I had to accelerate
to the next corner ahead of my competitor, I'll take the TR6 and just manage
the understeer. And don't underestimate the TR6's independent rear end. All
things being equal (ie, up to spec: bushings, shocks, and springs not worn
out), the TR6's rear end grips uneven road surfaces extremely well compared
to a live axle. Now, I'll be the first to admit that it does not have the
range of travel and is not on par with a really well engineered independent
rear end like a Vette. It was a typically cheap BL compromise. But its
decent.
Now lets talk creature comforts. I'd say my MGB is more comfortable
to sit in. The passenger compartment is several inches wider than the TR6
and that extra elbow room makes a real difference to me. The TR6 has a
little more leg room just because it is longer, but the leg room doesn't
overcome the confined feeling of your elbows pinned at your sides due to the
lack of width. I can't really address the dash or seats since, at least on
MGB's, these continued being revised through the years and it is somewhat
subjective anyway. For example, I hate the fact that my 68 MGB has no
glovebox. But I will say that, IMHO I think the TR6 dash is a work of art.
That, I'll admit is subjective.
The rest of the criteria is also mostly subjective opinion (body
style, reliability, etc) so I won't even talk about it. The bottom line for
me is that they are both wonderful cars that I dearly love. But like my
children, I love them each for their different positive qualities and try to
work around their negative qualities. BTW, I do sometimes find it amusing
that some listers are reluctant to even spell out the name Triumph on this
list. Like they're afraid of being ostracized. :-) Its like the Chevy vs
Ford good old boy rivalry. Interestingly enough, I'm on both mailing lists
and I've not really noticed as much reluctance to mention MG's on the
Triumph list (some of the people on the Triumph list also have MG's). Just
an observation.
Regards, Greg H. (both Triumph and MG enthusiast and hopefully, one day,
Jaguar enthusiast, too)
>Date: Fri, 09 Apr 1999 04:39:01 -0800
>From: "chief bootknocker" <mowog77@theglobe.com>
>Subject: My humble opinion(long) on Bs, C, and TR6s
>76 TR6 NonO/D
>I have always wanted a TR6 because the older kids on my street when i was a
kid had them. They >looked and sounded cool!
>I test drove one that had 60K on the odometer, not a spec of rust and was
all original.
>The car looked excellent in Carmine red, started like it was new and went
not much faster than >my B.
>when it hit a bump in the road it rocked like a boat.
>It cornered like an El Dorado and in my opinion deflated my bubble.
>I had hoped it would be a faster car. It was only marginally faster and
didn't come close to my >Bs handling capabilities.
>My opinion: If you are like me (like the looks of a TR6 and want some
speed) save yourself some >money and buy a B!! Bs outhandle the Tr6 and are
probably quicker off the line.
>Conclusion: I love my 77 MGB!!!!
>Erik.
|