parmparm Member Posts: 724
edited March 2014 in MG
OK. A TR6 is a sports car. So, I went to the Sports Car board and didn't see a category for Triumph's. So, I'm starting one here.

Anyone have any experience with these? Are these a pretty worthy car to consider if you're in the market for British sports car from late 60's to early 70's. Asking prices seem to be all over the board.

Hope to get plenty of comments.


  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,482
    Yeah, decent and affordable British sports car. Torquey engine, rides like a wheelbarrow, and has all the usual early British car faults. But they are true blue 'classic' British sports cars of the old school and can be a lot of fun.

    Anything from $6,000-10,000 is ball park for nice ones.

    My favorite is the TR250, which has the TR4 body and the TR6 engine. As the TR6 progressed, it got uglier and uglier due to the crash-proof bumpers.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,482
    Well it's a frame-off. You couldn't do it for $17.5K, and with quality frame-offs, the price guides go out the window. This car way better than "good" "clean" or "excellent", so priced accordingly.

    Nonetheless, even for a frame-off he is pushing the limits of the market.

    It may be worth every penny of $17.5K. I'd have to see it of course to know. There are some many variations in what people call "restored". For a British car, the first criteria for restored would have to be "better than Triumph ever built it", for openers.
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724 =2406561637

    Hard for me to justify paying these kinds of dollars for only two seats when I can get a nice, mid-60's, domestic land yacht for the same (or less) money.

    With only two seats, my wife and I couldn't take our kids. Wait. That might be a GOOD thing.
  • stickguystickguy Member Posts: 47,809
    I always wanted one of these. For some reason, I just really liked them. Of course, if I got one, it would hate driving it after the novelty wore off, but damn they look cool.

    Reminds me of my last house. Guy up the street was restoring a TR6 in his garage. Had it down to the bare chassis(on a dolly). Literally everything was off the car, down to the last nut and bolt. Still remember the day he was sandblasting the chassis. Too bad I moved before I saw the finished product, but it must have been immaculate, and probably much better the new.

    2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD , 2022 Ford Maverick Lariat Ecoboost FWD. - sold. 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury pending build

  • jrosasmcjrosasmc Member Posts: 1,711
    Does this mean you just purchased this vehicle?
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724
    Believe me, when I get my car, you will know in no uncertain terms. Assuming I have a mountain top from which to shout by then (ah Edmunds, we're sorry we don't fit into your business strategy).

    I was just considering other possibilities and have always like TR6's. Thought it might be fun being able to shift my own gears on a nice Spring day.

    But, for $13,000 to $14,000, I can get a very nice full-size, luxury convertible with way more seating room and a "real" trunk.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,017
    Parm, I thought you might appreciate some input from an ex-Triumph driver.

    My first sports car was a '66 solid axle TR-4A but I spent a lot of time behind the wheel of my brother's TR-250 so I can tell you a little bit about those cars which were mechanically identical to the TR-6.

    There's no doubt in my mind that a solid axle car will out handle any of the IRS TRs on a smooth road. The IRS design was a compromised one than allowed quite a bit of squat under acceleration and had a reputation for poor handling on wet pavement. In this respect it was similar to BMW 2002s and 320is for I think the same reasons having to do with the dreaded semi-trailing arm rear suspension.

    The Triumph 200cc six is a wicked smooth, torquey engine that really suits the character of the cars and sounds good too.

    The "big" TRs, TR-6 included are not the great handlers for 60s sportscars. For sheer tossability an MGB or Fiat 124 Spider were superior on twisty roads. TR-6s were great comfortable cruisers and didn't even require troublesome electric overdrives to go distances comfortably.

    TR-6 strong points-- Excellent brakes, smooth ride, strong gearbox
                          good coachwork less rust prone than TR-4/250.
                          Electrics a big improvement over TR-4
                          (alternator v generator).

    TR-6 weak points-- Excessive squat and ragged on-limit handling,
                          Poor top-sealing against weather, plastic
                          rear windows. Fussy Stromberg carbs.

    I hope this helps you. I'll be glad to answer any questions you might have. I'll see you in that other classic forum you are looking into.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • jrosasmcjrosasmc Member Posts: 1,711
    Are the Smiths gauges in TR-6s from the same company that produced those of the Volvo P1800s?
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,482
    God I hope not. One thing you'll often see on a P1800 is a row of dead gauges.
  • andys120andys120 Member Posts: 23,017
    IIRC P1800s were assembled in the UK by Jensen which would encourage British parts. I don't recall any gauges ever failing on my TR-4 tho my brother's tach went in his TR-250. I've still got it in a box somewhere.

    2001 BMW 330ci/E46, 2008 BMW 335i conv/E93

  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,482

    Volvo dash

    The TR6 gauges don't look anything like these, especially those barometer type gauges the most troublesome) between the speedo and tach.

    But they could be the same manufacturer, I don't recall.

    Anyway, they are notorious for failing on the P1800.
  • jrosasmcjrosasmc Member Posts: 1,711
    Please don't tell me Smiths also made the gauges for the 544 and 122 models.
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724 =2407740304

    Perhaps the TR6's I happen to see are the cream of the crop. Here's another one that didn't sell for $14,700. Don't know what the reserve was, but the "Buy It Now" price (which is probably inflated) was $21,400.

    I had no idea TR6's brought this kind of money!!
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,482
    They don't. Around $15K is current max for a fine car.
  • parmparm Member Posts: 724 =2407319974

    The bidding on this one is up to $18,700 with under an hour left.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,482
    that's Ebay sometimes. But one price doesn't set the market. $15K is enough, $18K is well..."ahead of the market.

    Of course I haven't seen the car. $15K is for a solid #2, but not a show car.
  • geo9geo9 Member Posts: 735
    Long ago I had a 72 TR-6 ! FUN car ........
    But it suffered thru many NY winters before I bought
    it for $200 bucks. Rusted so bad it wouldn't pass
    NYS inspection so it went off for parts..........

    I still have my 77 Triumph Bonneville 750 tho !!!!!!

    BTW: Didn't the tr-6s have 16 inch tires?????????
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,482
    Yeah the tin worm has brought many a British car to grief. In the UK they are used to dealing with rust. They cut cars up and put them back together and don't blink and eye doing it.

    Don't recall about the tires, but that doesn't sound right....the Jaguar XKs had 16".

    Nice bike the Bonneville. I used to own one---great handling bike. I could dance around Harleys and pinch their noses.
  • Mr_ShiftrightMr_Shiftright Member Posts: 64,482
    Okay, I checked: 15" wheels on a TR6
  • geo9geo9 Member Posts: 735
    I DO remember those red stripe sidewall tires too !

    I will NEVER forget those troublesome Lucas electronics
    and its almost time to pull the Bonnie outta the barn
    and get it purring for another NY summer !
This discussion has been closed.