Hi Jim:
I'm sorry I have to disagree with you. The engine was originally developed
by Standard to answer a predicted need for a powerful, roomy car to sell on
the world market. As Capt. Black of Standard knew that the old bore
horsepower tax was being phased out in favor of a flat tax, he approved the
design of a new 2 litre four cylinder engine in 1945. The engine was
designed to produce about 70 horsepower which was determined to be
necessary for a six passenger automobile to cruise at 65 mph. The new car
for which the engine was developed was designated the 20S. It was released
for production in 1948 as the Standard Vanguard.
At the end of the war, Standard had agreed with Ferguson to undertake the
manufacture of a new tractor which would require an engine similar to that
which was being designed for the 20S. The decision was made to use
components of the 20S in the Ferguson in order to cut costs. In a book
entitled "The Story of the Vanguard", published by the Standard Motor
Company Ltd. in 1949, the explanation is as follows:
"The Standard Vanguard and the Ferguson tractor have not the same engines.
Both engines are basically of the same type with four cylinders, overhead
valves and easily replaceable cylinder liners of the "wet" type, but as the
two engines operate under the entirely different conditions of car and
tractor propulsion, there are many differences of detail and arrangement.
The thing that matters is that there are enough similarities and so few
fundamental differences that a production of 1,000 engines a day for car
*or* tractor can be scheduled as a regular factory operation and this will
yield economies such as have seldom been achieved by any British
manufacturer."
The Vanguard engine - as it was referred to by Standard - was not a tractor
engine, nor was the tractor engine a car engine. However they used similar
internals, head and peripherals. The engines do not look alike as the
tractor engine casting is much different. It is much larger and wider than
the car engine.
The Vanguard engine was subsequently used in the Triumph 2000, pre-55
Morgans and TR2, TR3s and TR4s. The major changes to the engine for
sportscar use were the reduction of displacement from 2088cc to 1998cc and
the increase of compression ration from 6.7. This was coupled with a
redisigned camshaft and improved head with larger valves and dual
carburetion.
The Vanguard car continued to use the Vanguard 4 until 1961 when a
redesigned Standard 8/10 engine was developed into a six cylinder. This
engine was subsequently used in the Vitesse Six and Triumph 2000.
I have recently discovered that the TR7 engine was a joint development of
Saab and Triumph with the result being used in the Saab 99 in Sweden and
the Triumph Dolomite and TR7 in the UK.
As for impossible places on British engines I think you will find that this
is not a Standard exclusive. As for Ford tractors using Lucas equipment;
this is not surprising as Ford tractors were made in England. All of the
little grey tractors were built in England from the 1930s when Henry Ford
quit production of his tractor in the US because of competition from the
Farmall.
I know of few engines which produce maximum torque at very high rpm. The
Vanguard engine produced 68 hp @ 4200 rpm with 108 ft.lbs of torque at 2000
rpm. This is in keeping with most engines. For example, the MGB engine
produces 95 hp @ 5400 rpm and 110 ft.lbs of torque at 3,000. Perhaps you
are confusing horsepower with torque.
>The wet liner four cylinder engine used by the Triumph sports cars was
>originally design for, and used in a tractor, specifically, the
>Ferguson-Ford series of pre-war and immediately post-war models. This
>is why it is so massive, has the replaceble oil filter in such an
>inaccessible place on the side of the engine. Until very recently, most
>Ford tractors continued to use Lucas generators and altenators, and some
>other parts. In the old days (50's and 60's) one could always go to
>the local Ford tractor dealer to purchase many of the parts needed,
>including pistons, rings, and multiple other components.
>
>A few of the tip-offs are the weight of the flywheel, a necessity for a
>low reving tractor engine; the massive, cast iron block, needed for
>keeping the front of the tractor down when pulling heavy loads,
>interesting accomodations for changing the double roller timing chain,
>to compensate for chain stretch, and most obvious, the very low rev,
>high torque, nature of the engine. This final point is a central design
>concept for tractors, but rarely autos, where the usual is high revs,
>with torque maxima occuring in the 4000+ ranges.
>
>The basis for this choice was very simple: this engine was in
>production, was owned by Triumph Standard (Standard Motor Works, at the
>time,) and the company was in no position in the late 1940's to engage
>in new design. It only took the addition/design of a new manifold, in
>conjunction with development by SU of the appropriate needles for the
>carburettors, and ignition timing, to provide a slightly wider power
>range.
>
>I still have the original TR-2/3 shop manual that I ordered when I
>bought my TR-3A. This was when I graduated from high school in the mid
>60's. When you read this manual, which was as much a textbook on auto
>engineering and repair, as a repair manual for Triumphs, you can see the
>tractor heritage.
>
>Morgan generally made use of the Triumph, with the Morgan +4 always
>using the Triumph engines and transmissions, although sometimes some
>Morgans would come with a Ford 1600 engine.
>
>Cheers
>
>Jim R
|