DCTRA

Archive for the ‘Articles/Documents’ Category

Copy of a Tune and Tech checklist Worksheet that former DCTRA member Bob Lee put together back in 2001.

DCTRATuneandTech

Here is the list of Award Recipients from the 2009 Wheels of Britian Chow.  Congratulations to all the DCTRA/Triumph owners!

Wheels of Britain 2009

Award Recipient	Award	Class Description	Vehicle Marque /Series	Year	Vehicle No.
Jerry and Marcy Walton	1st Place	Austin Healey A-100	3000, BJ8	1966	A-105
Frank Summers	2nd place		100-4, BN1	1954	A-104
Russ and Jan Staub	1st Place		Austin A90, Atlantic Saloon	1950	C-105
Ettore Balleto	2nd Place	Classic 1955 and Earlier, C-100	MG-TA	1937	C-101
Jim Unsworth	3rd Place		Bentley, R-Type	1954	C-106
Christian Roe	1st Place		Aston Martin DB6	1966	C-202
Todd Williams	2nd Place, tie	Classic 1956 and Later, C-200	Westfield Seven	2003	C-203
David and Irene Grubbs	2nd Place, tie		Jaguar MKII	1963	C-205
Robert Patz	1st Place	DeLorean, D-100	DMC-12	1981	D-103
Joe Capano	1st Place	Jaguar Modern Saloons, J-300	XK8	2001	J-301
David Kubinski	1st Place		XKE Coupe	1963	J-404
Richard Skillman	2nd Place	Jaguar E-Type, J-400	XKE	1967	J-406
Larry Lemieux	3rd Place		XKE	1970	J-405
Robert Mann	1st Place	Jensen, J-500	Interceptor III	1973	J-502
Brett Engel	1st Place	Lotus Elan, L-100	Elan	1967	L-103
Bob Estabrook	1st Place	Lotus Esprit, L-200	Esprit	1983	L-201
Vivian Schiliro	1st Place	Lotus Elise, L-300	Elise	2005	L-302
Doug Pelton	1st Place		MG-TC	1949	M-103
Robert Hawkins	2nd Place	MG-TC, M-100	MG-TC	1948	M-101
JodyAnn West	1st Place		MG-TD	1950	M-208
Gale McCall	2nd Place	MG-TD, M-200	MG-TD	1953	M-205
Dave Ames	3rd Place		MG-TD	1953	M-201
Ken and Sandy Shriner	4th Place		MG-TD	1952	M-207
Paul Einan	1st Place		MGA	1962	M-403
Barbara and Danny Young	2nd Place	MGA, M-400	MGA	1958	M-408
Marie Thompson	3rd Place		MGA	1959	M-407
Milt Miles	4th Place		MGA	1960	M-405
Denis Stizza	1st Place		MGB	1964	M-505
David Kinnaman	2nd Place	MGB / MGB-GT, M-500	MGB-GT	1970	M-503
Richard and Marianne Mandziak	3rd Place		MGB	1972	M-507
Bob and Lynn Brown	1st Place		Bugeye Sprite	1959	M-601
Betsy Kavash	2nd Place	AH Sprite / MG Midget, M-600	Spridget	1966	M-603
Todd Williams	3rd Place		Spridget	1962	M-606
Larry Dunn	1st Place		4 Plus 4	1963	M-801
Scott Morrison	2nd Place	Morgan, M-800	4 Plus 4	1961	M-804
Ron Blair	3rd Place		Plus 8	1994	M-806
Rob Meier	1st Place		Morris Mini	1967	M-905
Bob and Lynn Brown	2nd Place	Classic Mini, M-900	Mini Cooper	1993	M-901
Ed and Emily Striffler	3rd Place		Rover Mini	1995	M-903
Karen and Gary Stevens	1st Place	Modern MINI, M-1000	Cooper S	2006	M-1002
Gene Watson	1st Place	Mini Utility, M-1100	Moke	1967	M-1102
Carl Ferrell	1st Place	Military, M-2000	Daimler MK2/3 Ferret	1955	M-2002
Kawasaki Superstore	1st Place	Motorcycle	Triumph Speedmaster	2009	MC-101
Richard Schulte	1st Place	Sunbeam, S-100	Tiger	1967	S-102
Stu Lasswell	1st Place	Triumph TR2 / TR3, T-100	TR3	1957	T-101
Eric Hoover	1st Place		TR5	1968	T-205
Jim Bauder	2nd Place	Triumph TR4 / TR4A / TR250, T-200	TR250	1968	T-201
Charles Engel	3rd Place		TR4A	1967	T-203
Keith Davis	1st Place		TR6	1974	T-301
Marie Thompson	2nd Place	Triumph TR6, T-300	TR6	1976	T-306
Gil Jackson	3rd Place, tie		TR6	1971	T-307
Jim Montague	3rd Place, tie		TR6	1975	T-308
Trudy Crable	1st Place		Spitfire	1964	T-501
George Durkin	2nd Place	Triumph Spitfire, T-500	Spitfire	1966	T-502
Dave Mure	3rd Place		Spitfire	1966	T-503
Richard Sanderson	1st Place		Morgan, 4 plus 4	1963	MA-107
Robert Izard	2nd Place		MG-TC	1948	MA-104
Wayne & Patsy Treloar	3rd Place	Masters�, MA-100	Triumph TR6A	1974	MA-108
Arvin Bernstein	4th Place		Panther, MKII	1963	MA-101
Jodyann West	5th Place		MGA	1962	MA-109
Eric Hoover	Longest Distance Driven, Santa Fe, NM		Triumph TR5	1968	T-205
Betsy Kavash	Spirit of Britain, Murph Memorial Award		AH Spridget	1966	M-603
Christian Roe	Best of Show		Aston Martin DBR	1966	C-202

Trail-Braking

Public roads offer a perfect venue to learn the “feel” of trail-braking, as you can develop the smooth footwork that’s required for this technique by gently lifting off the brake pedal while turning in at slow speeds.  Freeway on-ramps and off-ramps are great places for this.  Work on coordinating your brake release with turning input. Only release as much as you are willing to turn.  Only turn as much as you are willing to release.  The relationship between steering input and brake release (even throttle) needs to be directly proportional.  I call this “string theory” in that you imagine that there is a string tied to the bottom of the steering that is connected to your big toe.  If you turn the wheel that string will pull your foot off the pedal and if you push your foot down on the pedal it will in turn straighten the steering wheel.  When driving n a track at or near the limit of adhesion (how much grip your tires have), too much brake release results in oversteer, while not enough brake release can cause the front tires to understeer.

Obviously, the best place to practice trail-braking is at the track (while entering corners with plenty of run-off and no traffic around), but if you lack the “feel” of the maneuver, the learning curve is very steep.  Start at slow speeds and build up safely while below the limit.

Gripping the Wheel…

Pay attention to your stress levels while driving.  If your’re gripping the wheel too tight you can’t be smooth.  A famous British racing driver once said “You want to hold the wheel like your’re holding a little birdie.  You don’t want to hurt the birdie, but you don’t want it to get away either.

Also, the proper way to turn the steering wheel that encourages smoothness is to Push with the outside hand and pull with the inside hand.

When driving you will also want to resist the tendency to allow your shift hand to rest on the gear shift knob.  Get both hands on the wheel – especially when driving in traffic.  If you need to take evasive action you want both hands helping.  The shift lever is not an oar and you’re not rowing a boat.  You don’t need to row the car around the streets.

The classic hand positions on the steering wheel are 10-2 or 9-3. The reason for this is that with your hands up there it gives you leverage.  This is important on a track where you will probably be “fighting” the tires and the suspension with the car at the limit of adhesion.  Your arms are stronger then your hands but your hands are also important.  Think of your arms as providing course-gain control and your hands (or more correctly – your finger-tips) as providing fine-gain control.

Use your arms to provide steering direction (left/right) and your hands to provide steering control (how much left/right).

There are two acceptable methods for using your hands on the wheel when turning.  Cross-over and pre-setting are ok.  Shuffle steering is NOT.  Cross-over is when you keep your hands in the same place on the steering wheel and allow your arms to “cross” when turning.  Given the type of turns, the slow speed at which your are moving and other factors the cross-over method may not be to good on the street as you can quickly find yourself with arms completely crossed and still needing to turn the wheel.  Here is where the benefit of “pre-setting” really helps.

For example in a left hand turn using a pre-set hand position you would move your hands from the standard 10-2/9-3 position to placing your left hand at 12 and your right hand at 6 as you approached the turn.  Then when you are in the middle of your turn you will find that your hands are back in the classic 9-3 position and able to feed in or out any additional steering with your arms able to provide plenty of leverage.

Shuffle-steering (moving your hands constantly around the wheel) may find you lost as to what is straight ahead steering if you all of a sudden find yourself having to take evasive action.  Therefore don’t shuffle steer.

Lesson 3 – December 2007

Vision Lesson #3

Blind spots:

How many think their car has a blind spot?  Come on raise your hands.  Unless your driving an exotic sports car with a teeny tiny port hole for a rear window your vehicle most likely does not have one.  Also, if it seems to have a blind spot the reason may be wrong information you were given when taking drivers Ed from the Assistant Football Coach back in High School.

Try this exercise.  Go sit in your car.  Adjust the seat and steering wheel to where you want it – best is sitting up straight with the steering wheel close enough to you that you can lay your wrist over the top of it while still having arm bend at the your elbow and your shoulder blades resting against the seat.

Step 1: Roll up the drivers side window.  Lean over in the seat so that you rest the side of your head against the glass.  Now while looking in the side mirror (note these are “side” mirrors and not rear view mirrors) move it outward until you can just see the side of the car in the inside edge of the mirror.

Read the rest of this entry »

Marty Clark has once again made up some Calendars for the year featuring Members Cars!

2008 Calendar V. 1 (Featuring: Clark TR6, Cole TR250, Cooke Spitfire, Elisco TR6, Hanson TR8, Kenyon, TR6, Lasswell TR3, Long Spitfire, Melendez TR3, Mosher TR6, Peterson TR3, Reynolds TR6)

Lesson 2 – Nov 2007

Vision Lesson #2

Look Ahead – Be Ahead or the Present is already the Past

Advanced version of the BLT (Brake, Look, Turn) from last month.  It’s all about connecting the dots of S-turn sequences, and always looking one point – be it a turn-in point, apex point, or exit point – past the point your’re actually approaching.  To this end, work on forcing your vision outward and upward in order to extend your effective normal viewing range and the amount of visual information you take in.  Your goal here, literally, is to redefine where you’re looking – and how much you see – when “looking ahead.”

Find a road with lots of hairpins and switchbacks (difficult to find in the greater Phoenix area), and work on focusing one point past the next point in your driving line.  You’ll find that your “eye-lead time” is so great, at times you’ll be looking over your shoulder (and almost practically behind you!) before you turn in for the corner.  This not only trains your brain to look for the proper “sight picture” at your turn-in point, it will also help ensure you’ll never again be surprised by oncoming traffic.

Read the rest of this entry »

Lessons to practice on the street to make driving our LBC (Little British Cars) that much more enjoyable.

These tips are being included in the clubs Newsletters and will be posted here in the Articles/Documents section of the websit each month

---

Lesson 1 – Oct 2007Vision Lesson #1When I teach High Performance Driving (as opposed to Race Driving) there are a bunch of lessons and drills that Students can work on away from the track that will make a marked improvement in their abilities behind the wheel.  The first thing they have to realize is that no matter how many years they have been driving they have to leave their ego at the door so that they can make progress and become capable of doing more then just barely being able to drive from their Home to the Mini-mart and back.

This will be the first in an installment of driving exercises that you can work on to make driving your LBC and the Family Sedan safer and more enjoyable.

“BRAKE, LOOK, TURN”

This drill is designed to neutralize some of the hand-eye coordination that you began developing at an early age.  By the time we’re Adults, our eyes and hands are glued together.  This is a great skill to have if hitting a baseball but needs to be able to be broken at will for high-performance driving.  Your Eyes must be able to LEAD your hands.

When approaching a simple corner – for example a common left-turn on your suburban grid – make a deliberate effort to first brake and then look into the corner, all before actually turning the wheel.  Move your vision through the apex* and toward the exit as you add steering lock at the proper turn-in point.

Read the rest of this entry »

35 page PDF document showing the installation of sound deadening material under your carpets and a product comparison

Sound Deadener Showdown

David Vizard’s book (pdf format, 159 pages) from SpeedSport on…

Tuning Standard Triumphs – over 1300cc

SpeedSport Motorbooks manual (PDF format, 43 pages) on:

Tuning S.U. Carburetters, including full needle charts

Standard-Triumph issued TR-3 Owners Manual (PDF Format, 56 Illustrated pages)

Practical hints for the maintenance of the Triump;h T.R.3

Illustrated PDF manual (27 pages) on Repairing Jaeger & Smiths Speedometers

Dan Master Wiring Diagrams for the Following vehicles

TR2 – TR4a

TR250 – TR6

MGB

DCTRA’s own Craig Kenyon has created a great set of documentation for converting a TR6 over to a programmable elecronic ignition.

The following two PDF files will provide you with an illustrated step-by-step guide. Very informative and well written.

tr6_electronic_distributorless_ignition_kit_part1.pdf

tr6_electronic_distributorless_ignition_kit_part2.pdf

 OIL IS KILLING OUR CARS!!!!!

By: Keith Ansell, Foreign Parts Positively, Inc.

About a year ago I read about the reduction of zinc dialkyl dithiophosphate (ZDDP) in the oils supplied with API approval that could affect sliding and high pressure (EP) friction in our cars. The reduction of these chemicals in supplied oils was based on the fact that phosphates reduce the effectiveness and eventually damage catalytic converters and introduce minute amounts of pollutants into our atmosphere.

A couple of months ago I had a member of the Columbia Gorge MG Club bring a totally failed camshaft and lifters back to me that had only 900 miles on them!! I immediately contacted the camshaft re-grinder (Delta Cam) and asked how this could happen. They were well aware of this problem as they were starting to have many failures of this type. In the past, the lack of a molybdenum disulfide camshaft assembly lubricant, at assembly, was about the only thing that could create this type of problem. My customer has assembled many engines and had lubricated the camshaft properly. Then the bad news came out: It’s today’s “modern” API (American Petroleum Industry) approved oils that are killing our engines: Meaning all flat tappet (cam follower) equipped engines, as used in all BMC products, all British Leyland products, most pushrod engines prior to 1980, early Volvos, American high-performance engines and many others.

Next call: To a major camshaft supplier, both stock and performance (Crane). They now have an additive for whatever oil you are using during break-in so that the camshaft and lifters won’t fail in an unreasonably short period of time. They also suggest using a diesel rated oil on flat tappet engines.

Next call: To a racing oil manufacturer that we use for the race cars (Red Line Oil). Their response: “We are well aware of the problem and we still use the correct amounts of those additives in our products”. They continued to tell me they are not producing API approved oils so they don’t have to test and comply. Their oils were NOT the “new, improved and approved” ones that destroy flat tappet engines! “We just build the best lubricants possible”. Sounds stupid, doesn’t it, New-Approved but inferior products, but it seems to be true for our cars.

To top this off: Our representative from a major supplier of performance and street engine parts (EPWI) stopped by to “warn us” of the problem of the NEW oils on flat tappet  engines. This was a call that the representative was making only because of this problem to warn their engine builders! “The reduction of the zinc, manganese and phosphates are causing very early destruction of cams and followers”. They are recommending that, for now at least, there must be a proper oil additive put in the first oil used on new engines, beyond the liberal use of molydisulfide assembly lube. They have been told that the first oil needs the additive but remain skeptical that the first oil is all that is necessary. Their suggestion: Use diesel rated oils such as Delo or Rotella that are usually available at auto stores and gas stations.

This problem is BIG! American Engine Rebuilder’s Association (AERA) Bulletin #TB2333 directly addresses this problem.  I had a short discussion with their engineer and he agreed with all that I had been finding.

Next phone call was to a retired engineer from Clevite, a major bearing and component manufacturer. First surprise was that he restored older British Motor bikes. The second surprise was that he was “VERY” aware of this problem because many of the old bikes had rectangular tappets that couldn’t rotate and are having a very large problem with the new oils. He has written an article for the British Bike community that verify all the “bad news” we have been finding.

Comp Cams put out “#225 Tech Bulletin: “Flat Tappet Camshafts”. They have both an assembly lube  and an oil additive. The telling sentence in the bulletin was “While this additive was originally developed specifically for break-in protection, subsequent testing has proven the durability benefits of its long term use. This special blend of additives promotes proper break-in and protects against premature cam and lifter failure by replacing some of the beneficial ingredients that the oil companies have been required to remove from the “off-the–shelf oil”.

Next question: Now what do we do?

From the camshaft re-grinders (DeltaCam) “Use oils rated for diesel use”, Delo (Standard Oil product) was named. About the same price as other quality petroleum based oils. They have the ZDDP we need in weights we are familiar with.

From one camshaft manufacturer (Crane): “use our additive” for the first 500 miles.

From General Motors (Chevrolet): add EOS, their oil fortifier, to your oil, it’s only an 8-ounce can (This problem seems to be something GM has known about for some time!).  The additive says for break-in only, some dealers add it to every oil change.

From Redline Oil: Use our street formulated synthetics. They have what we need! Early in 2007 they will be supplying a “break-in oil” specifically for our cars.

From Castrol: We are beginning to see a pattern emerging on older cars. It may be advantageous to use a non-approved lubricant, such as oils that are Diesel rated, 4 Cycle Motorcycle oils and other specified diesel oils. They will be supplying “new oils” specifically for our cars in early 2007.

For you science buffs: ZDDP is a single polar molecule that is attracted to Iron based metals. The one polar end tends to “Stand” the molecule up on the metal surface that it is bonded to by heat and friction. This forms a sacrificial layer to protect the base metals of the cam and tappet from contacting each other. Only at very high pressures on a flat tappet cam is this necessary because the oil is squeezed/wiped from the surface. This high pressure is also present on the gudgeon pin (wrist pin) in diesel engines, therefore the need for ZDDP in all diesel engines.

Second part of the equation is Molybdenum disulfide (Moly). The moly bonds to the zinc adding an additional, very slippery, sacrificial layer to the metal. I found out that too much of the moly will create problems; lack of this material reduces the effectiveness of the ZDDP. The percentage, by weight is from .01 to .02%, not much, but necessary according to the chemists.

Now there is no denying that there is a problem, lack of ZDDP (Zinc Dialkyl DithioPhosphate) in modern oils kills at least our cams and tappets. There seems to be no known alternative.

Our cars are a small percentage of the total market and BIG Corporate, the American Petroleum Institute and possibly government have made decisions that are detrimental to our cars. This problem isn’t going away. The trend today is to lighter weight oils to decrease drag, which increases mileage. Most of these seem to be the “Energy Conservation” oils that we cannot use.

Redline oil and others are suggesting a 3,000-mile break-in for new engines! Proper seating of rings with today’s lubricants is taking that long to properly seal. Shifting to  synthetics before that time will just burn a lot of oil and not run as well as hoped.

The “Energy Conservation“ trend was first led by automakers to increase mileage numbers and secondly because the ZDDP and other chemicals degrade the catalytic converter after extended miles, increasing pollution. Most of us don’t have catalytic converters and the mileage gains are not that significant.

Many oil companies may have products that will continue to function well in our cars. Castrol, Redline, Valvoline, Mobil, Shell, Amsoil and others have now commented on my original article and are making suggestions. Some companies are offering short lists of “acceptable” oils, others just one. One company has responded without any substantive information in a two-page “bulletin”. By their account all their oils are superior and applicable. This is typical of many companies.

Some oil manufacturers are pointing to metallurgy, blaming poorly built cams and followers. This may have some validity but the bottom line is that there has been a big increase in failures with products that have been on the market for many years but are now having greatly increased failures. To me the bottom line is, if the lubricants are working there is no contact between surfaces, it shouldn’t matter what the materials used in the products are, within reason.

On “modern” production cars, stay with the manufacturers’ suggestions. For any car produced before about 1990 the owner needs to be aware that the factory suggested lubricant may have changed and may not be applicable. Flat tappet, stock, performance or modified may be affected. MGBs from 1975 to 1980 must choose to sacrifice the cam or the catalytic converter as an example of how difficult the decisions are becoming!

Yes, there is more! Castrol does understand our dilemma and is actively looking into what it can do to support our cars. We can soon expect to see products from them with specific application to classic cars. Red Line will be offering a “break-in” oil soon after the first of the year. Shell’s Rotella will be good until about June or July of 2007 with possibly nothing after that date. Delo (Chevron) will also be questionable after the new “CJ-4” standards come in the middle of 2007.

Now the important information: Oils that may be correct for our cars today:

(As reported by manufacturers by 2-18-07, NOTE: many have changed their recommendations over the last three months!

 Castrol:  Syntec “Classic” 20W-50 (Available after April, 2007), TWS Motorsport 10W-60*, BMW Long Life 5W-30*

         *= full synthetic, available only at BMW dealerships

Red Line: 10W-30, 10W-40 (Synthetic oils)

Valvoline: VR-1 20W-50 (Conventional oil)

Amsoil: 20W-50(TRO), 10W-40(AMO), 15W-40(AME) & 20W-50(ARO)

Mobil: Mobil 1 5W-30 and 20W-50 (Synthetic)

Chevron: Delo 400

Shell: Rotella

What we are doing at Foreign Parts Positively has been difficult to determine but with few options left, the following is what we are forced to do. Some of our choices have been based on the manufacturer’s willingness to help and specific reports. This list will change in the next months with Castrol and Red Line adding products just for our cars.

            Break in, Delo 400 30W (A break-in oil will be available from Redline soon!), Castrol HD-30 if produced before July 2006, we have some old stock.

            Conventional oil: Valvoline VR-1 20W-50, Castrol GTX-20w-50 IF produced before July 2006, we have old stock.
            Synthetic: Red Line 10W-30 in newer engines, 10W-40 on older engines.

            Break-in is now 3,000 miles before changing to running oil.

            Oil change interval: 1 year or 18,000 miles with Red Line synthetic

                                             1 year or 2,500 miles with conventional oil (Valvoline VR-1 20W-50).

 

Thank you to Castrol, Redline, Christiansen Oil, Valvoline, Mobil, Shell, Standard Oil and Amsoil for input. We’re sure this subject will continue: Please forward any new information on this subject you may encounter.

We have received some very interesting material from “Mr Moly” that may be putting molybdenum disulfide (MoS) into this discussion. It seems that ZDDP plus MoS is the best from the oil companies’ opinion but MoS by itself may be beneficial. Some racers swear by it. The literature seems to support “Mr. Moly’s” position.

Keith M. Ansell

Foreign Parts Positively, Inc.

www.ForeignPartsPositively.com

Kma4285@msn.com

360-882-3596

Article from the March 1971 issue of Car & Driver Magazine remembering the TR3. The article was titled: “The Unlikely Tractor” with the sub-title “Out of desperation Triumph mated an unimaginative British Saloon with, of all things, a tractor engine and the resultant issue went on to become one of the world’s most popular sports cars.”

—————————-

It was an evil sounding, raucous little bastard that would lure you into a corner all cozily understeering the way you’d expect from a car with 2-liters worth of good stout cast iron way up front, then throw up its hands and bumble off backward.
There was nothing delicate about it, either. None of your clipping daisies with a knockoff. You drove it like a USAC Sprinter, all elbows and shoulders, and when the weird harmonics set in at 3700 revs and it gave off that hairy chested bellow, it sounded ready to take on any Super Car in town. All 100 advertised horse-power of it.

Strangest of all, it never quit running. Somehow, electronics not withstanding, the flat top pistons kept popping up and down and the valves kept clattering away mile after mile after mile.

Unforgiving, brawny, dependable…it was, in short, everything a British sports car was not.
At the same time, it seemed the very epitome of traditional British machinery. The oddly trapezoidal lines, the tooth rattling four-banger engine, the built-in agony of the cockpit, the 19-snap cloth top that was designed to channel the rain at you instead of vice versa, all were in the mold of the typical mid-Fifties British sports car.

So it was a puzzle. An enigma that wasn’t what it seemed and seemed to be what it wasn’t. Which was the mystery, the unfathomable stubborn charm of the TR-3. Or, to its intimates (who learned the hard way to deal with its mechanical idiosyncrasies) the TR-goddam-3. More correctly, the TR-3, TR-3, TR-3A and the TR-3B. In all 83,572 sports cars that are still showing people a viable alternative to Detroit seven years after the last one left Coventry.

In retrospect, the TR-3 had no business being such a marvelous misfit. It sprang, after all, from an impeccably British background. The paternal side of the line was a succession of incredibly dull saloons and tourers extending all the way back to 1903. Its mother was a tractor.

Further , it owed its existence, ultimately, to a gentlemen named Reginald W. Maudslay, whose feelings about car design didn’t bode well for sports cars. He explained, “I don’t want any of these new ideas. I want my car to be composed purely of those components whose principles have been tried and tested and accepted as reliable standards.”

With that, in 1903, the company that would one day give birth to the TR-3 was founded. Not unexpectedly, Maudslay called it the Standard Motor Company.

For some 50 years, the “nothing new” principle guided the fortunes of the company, and guided them rather well. Although no on was shouting loud huzzahs over the cars Maudslay produced, they were selling well. Then the First World War brought lucrative government contracts for everything from BE-12 bi-planes to Stokes Trench Mortars. This allowed Standard to expand its factories so that at war’s end the company could get on in style with the job at hand: grinding out thousands of reliable, conservative cars for thousands of reliable, conservative customers.

When Maudslay died in 1934, the company continued on in his tradition. Even after the Second World War, which yielded its share of government contracts for the firm, more of the same dull cars seemed to be in the offing. And as a matter of fact Standard did produce a gaggle of re-hashed 1939 designs after the war. But a bizarre set of circumstances was developing: so bizarre that the Standard Motor Company, as it was before the war, would not survive but would turn into something entirely new; so bizarre, that it lead to the birth of the TR-goddam-3.

First, in 1945, Standard bought a down-and-out ragamuffin of a company called Triumph. An automotive off-shoot of the prosperous Triumph motorcycle operation, it had been floundering even before the war. Then Heinkels and Dorniers of the Luftwaffe came to finish off the job. So what Standard got for its money was Triumph’s “good will” and a whole lot of bomb craters. And an outlet for some new products.

With one eye firmly on the profit ledger, Standard set its new subsidiary to work on an unlikely project. Not a car. Not even a motorcycle. But, of all things, a tractor! It was to be a four-wheel-drive machine based on an 8-hp Standard car engine.

The project itself never amounted to anything. But it turned out to have been a pretty good move anyway. Triumph, instead of making its own tractors, wound up with a fat contract to produce the Ferguson tractor. More importantly, that contract included a license to produce the Ferguson engine – a 2-liter in-line Four with chrome wet-liners in a cast-iron block.

The company’s first move was to design a car around the tractor motor. It was a dumb, bulbous little family car called the Vanguard, built with one eye on the anemic postwar economy in Europe and the other eye on the newly stringent vehicle tax laws. The same engine wound up in another pair of cars – cars that were being produced more or less with Triumph’s left hand while the right hand concentrated on the tractor business. These were an odd-looking but interesting roadster and a handsome razor-edge saloon, both called the TR-1800.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the ocean, another event in the bizarre sequence was underway. America had discovered the sports car. Thousands were outfitting themselves in tweed caps and string-backed gloved and spending big money for anything automotive that looked slinky and came from overseas. The boom was on, money was flowing and MG and Jaguar were selling more cars than they made.

That sort of thing wasn’t likely to go unnoticed at the Standard works, of course. So, just six months before the 1952 Earls Court Auto Show, the company decided to claim a piece of the active. A hastily devised roadster body with cut down doors, a bobbed-tail and a puckered little grille was clapped onto a Vanguard frame, the trusty tractor motor was dropped in place and – voila – the 1952 show car from Triumph.

Out on the test track the thing turned out to handle like a three-legged camel but that was a minor detail – besides that wouldn’t be apparent on the show stand. So it was off to Earls Court. There, even though the most dim-bulb showgoer could see it had no provision for luggage, it was a hit. More importantly, it hunkered down neatly into the market gap between the 1250cc MG and the 3.5-liter Jaguar.

So the engineers set about making the TR-1 (yes, there really was a TR-1) into something you could drive without maiming yourself and which could carry something more substantial than a Dopp Kit. Retaining the same basic body, they gave it a longer tail with a hint of a trunk, devised a new frame, fiddled with the suspension and by 1953 were producing the TR-2. It came on like Genghis Kahn in the marketplace.

For that matter, it did pretty well on the road, too. As soon as the photographers were done with it, Ken Richardson, the competition director of Triumph, took the prototype, stuck on a belly-pan and some streamlining, removed the windscreen and was clocked at 124 mph down the Jabbeke highway in Belgium – a new record. And almost as soon as it hit this country the TR was super plan in E-Production racing. It was low, it was little (11.55 square feet of frontal area without the windscreen), it would turn 100 mph century and then some, and it had torque to burn for starts and digging out of slow corners (remember, the engine was originally designed to pull a two-bottom plow).

Getting it stopped could be an adventure, but even that was alleviated in 1957 when the car (by this time it has been through a series of minor design changes and was called the TR-3) came with a set of Girling disc brakes in front.

Best of all from a racing standpoint was the fact that it never, never broke down. You practically had to throw rocks in the sump to blow the engine and one of the favorite pastimes of TR-3 fans is swapping stories of TR-3’s that survived hideous disasters and kept going.

For instance, there was one TR-3 that actually ran the last 12 laps of a race in Bainbridge, Georgia, in 1965 on only three wheels – and finished third in class. An off-course excursion early in the race ripped out the left from suspension, leaving the wheel dangling from the upper A-arm and the steering arm. The driver commented “It was pretty sloppy in a right hand turn after that, but it ran like stink down the straights and through the left handers, so I just kept on going and hoped the corner crews would’nt notice.”

Another TR-3 ran a whole race at Courtland, Alabama, with the wrist pin in number four cylinder machining a deep groove in the bore after its retaining clip fell out. And still another TR-3 flipped at the Chimney Rock, North Carolina, hill-climb, was righted, had the oil topped up and went on to win its class.

The stories are almost endless, but the point is that the TR was virtually indestructible and it was fast for its time – it was also cheap. So for years it had pretty much its own way cleaning up championship after championship in SCCA and international competition.

Not that there weren’t some ups and downs along the way. In 1957, for example, the AC Bristol arrived on the scene looking as alluring as a Port Said hooker and running like some kind of 12-liter Altas-Agena. The TR-3 was so badly outclassed it couldn’t even stay within rock throwing distance on the track.

Things took a turn for the better in 1959, thanks to R.W. “Kas” Kastner, who was a hero TR-3 racer in California. He became obsessed with the nutball notion that the TR-3 could be induced to beat the dreaded invader of E-Production. Creating a “production” TR-3 like no one in England had ever seen, Kastner proceeded to hustle the AC right out of its championship on its own home stomping grounds in California.

For years, the TR-3 had its way with the competition. Despite the fact that it went out of production at the end of the 1962 run, the marvelous misfit kept on winning, filling the grid at the annual championship ARRC and often as not bringing home the silverware. It was positively embracing. The factory’s fist blush of pride for the car soon turned to doubt, then to outright dismay. After all, the car wasn’t even in production anymore. There were new models to sell. Sheepishly, the factory reduced its support money for winning TR-3s. Finally the money was cut off completely. The SCCA, taking the hint, bumped the car back into E-Production where – it was assumed – the senile ole campaigner wouldn’t be able to cut the mustard anymore. But it could and did and still does. Not as often as before, of course, but often enough to bring a twinge to the engineers who made her.

Those engineers, it seems, had wrought something particularly rare and fine. An honest car. No pretensions, no illusions. Four wheels and an engine laid out in the simplest possible fashion.

You sat in plain leather bucket seats with your legs out in front of you straight as sticks to the firewall where hung the requisite three pedals. The throttle, although it operated through a Rube Goldberg collection of ball-jointed rods, bell cranks, cotter pins and bedsprings, was direct and responsive. X amount of input yielded X amount of engine noise every time.

A flat, plain dashboard held all the instruments and switches you needed to get on with your driving. The mechanical tach drove directly off the distributor and registered on a big Smith’s dial immediately in front of you with enthusiastic swoops of the needle. Next to it was an equally excitable speedometer. Nearby, clustered in a small panel at the center of he dash were the other appropriate dials: “Fuel,” “Amps,” “Oil Press” and “Water Temp” (often as not in degrees centigrade). In all, six plain white-on-black dials that told their story with Hemingwayesque directness.

The shift lever had a hard rubber knob that soon lost its hardness and felt like a fistfull of cold oatmeal. but it stood severely upright in the middle of the transmission hump and it changed gears with a satisfying “snick”. And, although the synchronizers lasted only about a week, it took terrible abuse to cause a serious malfunction of the gearbox. you simply learned to shift by ear, like a proper driver should.

It was honest in motion, too. The macadam whizzed past in a blur just under your elbow, which stuck out over the cut-down door. The breezes fluttered your collar, your sleeves, even your pants cuffs down in the footwell. In fact with the top and side curtains down you stood a pretty good chance of being flapped insensible by your clothes. At 70 mph you knew you were, by gosh, doing 70 mph.

In the end that basic honesty – which made it a winner on the track – was what did the car in at the marketplace. Through the years minor changes like a new color scheme for the badge and major changes like a series of new heads failed to alter the basic personality of the car. Even in 1962 when it was all gussied up with a TR-3 engine (2138cc) and a TR-4 gearbox (fully synchronized) it was still stubborn, straightforward and honest as an oak tree. It was still the TR-goddam-3, even if the factory called it a TR-3B.

And so, by 1961, a year before its final demise, the end was in sight. A new car was being born in Coventry. Boxy in line, refined in concept (at least by comparison to the rustic, lusty TR-3), the TR-4 reflected a new generation’s ideas about driving. Although the TR-4 was at first little more that a TR-3 with a civilized body, that difference was enough. The new generation had little use for the rain-water-in-the-ear school of driving that spawned the TR-3.

But before you write off the TR-3 as a relic from an earlier time, please notice one thing. Notice who is at the wheel of the next TR-3 you see on the road.

Odds on he’s yours. Maybe with a beard. And with a post-teenybopper with a Mighty-Mouse appliqued tee-shirt at his side. Grinning and blipping that wonderful throttle as he goes. And where is your generation gap now, sir?

(reproduced with permission)