By Dean Sprague

Recently I have been working on several TR6s for and with fellow club members. When the work is completed a test drive is always required. It’s funny how you forget what you liked about a certain car until you drive it again. A good running TR6 is almost synonymous with driving a modern car. I know I mentioned earlier how I had a soft spot for the TR4a and I do but the TR6 is very attractive since it’s tight, smooth, spirited and still affordable. Before you know it you could be thinking about getting another one. Of course, all I would have to do to acquire another car is “thin the herd” or take up residence in the garage.

My affection for Triumphs is longstanding. In fact, my first car was a $265.00 1955 Triumph TR2. It was a very tried, seriously corroded unreliable vehicle but it was my first car (money earned bagging grocery’s) and therefore was loved on that premise alone. Since then I have owned a 1959, 60 and 62 TR3a, and another 1960 TR3a I tried to restore and drive. I also had another 1959 TR3a I tried to race. I only had two obstacles to overcome, inadequate funding and limited racing skills. This resulted in an abbreviated racing career created by a multiple roll while over correcting in a turn. I had a 1963 TR4 that I drove extensively, a new 1967 TR4a that I covenanted and at almost the same time 1968 TR250 that I co-owned with my then business partner. Since then I have owned a new 1971 TR6, a 1972 and a 1976 TR6 I frame-off restored, three 1974 TR6’s, two 1968 TR4a’s plus several parts cars. In addition, I also restored a 1971 Triumph Stag and bought a new TR7 in 1979. My Mother used to say, “if you can’t say something nice about a person don’t say anything at all”. I am not sure this applied to cars but if it did we will only say I had a bad experience regarding the Stag and the TR7 not much better. Actually the Stag restoration was an adventure that probably warrants a separate article.

I may have mentioned this earlier but the early TRs were rather brutish in appearance and lacked basic creature comforts but were powerful and reliable. Actually it wasn’t until the Michelotti redesigned TR4 that they could even be considered “pretty” at all. In addition, the TR4 finally addressed the limited comfort issues with a roomier cockpit, roll-up side screens and front ventilation. Significant improvements were also made in handling with wider wheel tracks and rack and pinion steering. All this was accomplished while retaining the basic “tried and true” drivetrain qualities of the TR2/3. The engine was simply increased to 2.2 liter and the gearbox to a full synchromesh on all gears. Later the harsh ride and somewhat unpredictable road handling were addressed with an independent rear suspension that began in the TR4a (as an option in the States). The TR5/250 (US spec cars) retained the TR4a body but addressed a demand for smoother power by using their 2498cc six-cylinder engine. The TR5 and later the TR6i employed the Lucas mechanical fuel injection. This generated 150 strong HP but lacked reliability still it was a 50% increase over the old four-cylinder engine. I think in reflection

The German Bosch mechanical K fuel injection might have been a smarter choice. Unfortunately, we here in the States received the “250” version which really wasn’t any quicker (if as fast) than the TR4a. The TR250 was smoother but due to poorly addressed anti-pollution add-ons didn’t run as well. Since I happened to have a new TR4a and a TR250 at the same time I can assure you that the TR4a was usually my driver of choice. The story I heard was when they were testing the Federal spec (USA) version of the TR5 an employee commented that “this car is half a TR5 so lets call it a 250”. I don’t know if this is accurate but it certainly sounds like the Brits dry humor.

By the late 1960s The Michelotti TR4 design was getting “long in the tooth” so it was time for a fresher face. Triumph wanted Michelotti to do the redesign but they were to busy so they went to Karmann of Germany. Since Triumph’s resources were limited they directed Karmann to design a “continuation” of the basic TR4 tub but create a newer more modern design around it. The rest as they say is history. The TR6 was warmly received especially in the States. I remember seeing my first TR6 at the 1969 Miami auto show. I committed then and there to own one of these as soon as the Navy would let me go. I bought a brand new 1971 in late 1970. I was still in the Navy but by then I was making just enough money to almost afford one and besides I just couldn’t wait any longer. I drove that TR6 everywhere. I think if Triumph knew that, they would have rented it to me by the mile. If I hadn’t lost my head over a 1970 “leftover” E Type after I left the Navy I would have kept it longer. Well maybe.

Triumphs were usually my first choice in a sports car that is if I couldn’t afford another Jaguar. Which was almost always the case. I found them to be a great value for the money. They are not sophisticated or extremely well engineered. Triumph was still using body on ladder frame construction unlike the MGB’s more rigid and wider monocot design. Maybe we will talk about my history with MGs later. I’ve had a few of these great cars as well. The TR6 was a trifle more expensive than the MGB but they had more torque, smoother power and a muscular appearance with their wide wheels at the corners. Their aggressive looks were unchallenged by their competition. Years later the TR6 seemed to go unnoticed when looking for a classic restoration candidate. I think people today are beginning to recognize the real beauty and the performance bargain you will find in the TR6. Their prices are finally going upward. It seems these days at every British car show there is a nice line of restored/well-maintained TR6s. Where else could you get 6-cylinder power, full independent suspension, a real wood dash, rich interiors, convenient soft top and/or weather proof hard top, optional air conditioning and over drive with plenty of room for luggage in a sports car capable of exceeding modern road speeds at half the cost of a comparatively reconditioned 3000 Healey? Well, nowhere but the TR6.