|
|
|
Sept 7, 2011 11:41:35 GMT
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 7, 2011 13:11:47 GMT
|
I really do think the Stag is a beautiful car... Although the Triumph V8 is not too bad now (it may not have been that bad to start with really) I wish they would have gone for the Rover V8 originally... Imagine if they used a bored out version (say 4.2 or so!!!) of that in the Stag when it first launched, it would've been as amazing as it always was but with just a tad more reliability and a hell of a lot more poke (and it would've saved Triumph a few quid so they could've developed the Stag Coupe  )...    |
| |
***GARAGE CURRENTLY EMPTY***
|
|
ChasR
RR Helper
motivation
Posts: 10,197
Club RR Member Number: 170
|
'74 Triumph Stag [pics]ChasR
@chasr
Club Retro Rides Member 170
|
Sept 7, 2011 19:50:24 GMT
|
|
Amazing what a drop can do to any car isn't it? Depending on how mine goes it is something I am considering.
I quite like the look of the Stag, and after buying one recently, it is a little frustrating to see how BL could get such a car so wrong when it came to selling it ((I believe some called it the Midland Mercedes (maybe a step too far, but still)), but that could be said for anything they made.
I dunno, the Stag V8 does sound nicer than a Rover V8 IMO, and I am not alone in that thought, and they are meant to be a little revvier. As with anything BL, politics, lacksure workmanship, and accountant's purses always played a part. I remember a guy I know (who had ties at BL and Chrysler) saying the first few Stags BL made to show to the powers of be were actually not too bad.
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Sept 7, 2011 20:52:38 GMT
|
|
|
| |
|
|
delmastiff
Part of things
Loving Life in the Fair Cape
Posts: 741
|
|
Sept 8, 2011 21:34:53 GMT
|
|
|
| |
|
|
luckygti
Posted a lot
I need to try harder!
Posts: 4,912
|
|
Sept 8, 2011 22:07:41 GMT
|
OOOOFFFFFF! To both, I would truly love a Stag and have a hankering for a V8  I think I really need to start working on SWMBO (who really doesn't like them  ) Waht are they like to drive? |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OOOOFFFFFF! To both, I would truly love a Stag and have a hankering for a V8 I think I really need to start working on SWMBO (who really doesn't like them ) Waht are they like to drive? If she doesn't like it, there's always the bus.  Mother had a Magenta Stag, for 6 hours, loved her w114 too much to swap, so there's no pics, or memories for me. Anyway, very nice, not so sure on that coupe one... Rear glass just looks too much. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hey guys, That Stag you posted at the start (white one) is mine. It's listed on my website @ www.triumphowners.com/to-car/stag-mk2-3/ Feel free to ask any questions you like. The original engine is certainly not without its problems. But the value of the car is far less without it. Yes it does rev better than a rover v8 for sure. Personally I think they look ridiculous as standard but have heaps of potential. That's why I lowered mine quite a lot, put much lower profile tyres than usual and did nothing much else to the body. |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 17, 2016 17:21:33 GMT
|
|
I've a hankering after one, fitted with a modern TD V6, from something like a Chrysler 300C. The looks are timeless cool, but having a tad too much Scottish in my blood, I'd find the fuel consumption a bit of a hindrance. I'd want to use it all the time, but would begrudge the constant petrol station visits. I think this setup would make it the ideal long distance cruiser. The downside though, would be the loss of that undoubtedly fabulous V8 soundtrack. Please feel free to abuse my ideas, if any of you owning one, can convince me to live with the original engine ( originality doesn't hugely worry me - I want to drive it - not stand & look at it).
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 17, 2016 23:03:00 GMT
|
Hey guys, That Stag you posted at the start (white one) is mine. It's listed on my website @ www.triumphowners.com/to-car/stag-mk2-3/ Feel free to ask any questions you like. The original engine is certainly not without its problems. But the value of the car is far less without it. Yes it does rev better than a rover v8 for sure. Personally I think they look ridiculous as standard but have heaps of potential. That's why I lowered mine quite a lot, put much lower profile tyres than usual and did nothing much else to the body. Very, very tasty and about as far from home as it could physically get! Oh, and welcome to the board. The Stag is an itch I sadly never got the chance to scratch, but if I ever could then this would do very nicely! |
| |
Last Edit: Dec 17, 2016 23:04:26 GMT by georgeb
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 17, 2016 23:45:30 GMT
|
You gotta love a Stag! With proper attention to detail, the original motors can now be built reliable with more horses than the paltry 140 they came with. But it's not cheap and the timing chains and cooling system will still need regular maintainence. The Stag's unique exhaust note comes from it's unusual firing order, can't remember the Stag firing order but it's not the 1-8-4-3-6-5-7-2 of the Rover and all yanks (Yes I know the Rover is a yank design) For me, the best thing is that non standard cars are worth so much less than those with the original motor, it means you can have a car with the reliable and more powerful Rover V8 for less money than than the temperamental Triumph standard offering. So you have a great choice,you can have a valuable show car with a stock engine which is probably OK cos it will do very few miles in anger, or, for a lot less, you can have a daily driveable V8 coupe that is stylish, practical, pretty, quick and has the V8 soundtrack. They are not that bad on fuel either. One of my customers has a 3.5 carbed Rover V8 Stag wit a manual LT 77 box fitted and that does 30+ MPG on a run.  This one! Steve  Sorry about the lousy pic. maybe this one will be better! |
| |
Last Edit: Dec 17, 2016 23:54:24 GMT by carledo
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Just want to play devil's advocate for a moment: Rover V8's aren't exactly exempt from issues - and the Stag V8's not only more powerful than a lot of standard 3.5s (especially if they've some miles on them), they're also much more eager. They know how to rev in stock form, haha, unlike a boggo 3.5.
Not tricky to extract more go from them, either - but obviously not as much aftermarket support as there is for the Rover V8.
|
| |
Last Edit: Dec 18, 2016 9:27:33 GMT by Lewis
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 18, 2016 19:53:58 GMT
|
Just want to play devil's advocate for a moment: Rover V8's aren't exactly exempt from issues - and the Stag V8's not only more powerful than a lot of standard 3.5s (especially if they've some miles on them), they're also much more eager. They know how to rev in stock form, haha, unlike a boggo 3.5. Not tricky to extract more go from them, either - but obviously not as much aftermarket support as there is for the Rover V8. The Stag V8 at 140bhp is less powerful than any of the Rover models, with the possible exception of the early low comp carbed Range Rover. But the P5 and P6 started at 155bhp and got better. And yes the Rover lump has issues, but they are nearly all down to neglect/bad maintainence, whereas the Triumph's issues are down to bad design and poor build quality. And there are just SO many Rover lumps about, there is really no excuse for running a duff one! I have seen (in Triumph World mag IIRC) a properly developed supercharged Stag engine but the guy spent many thousands of pounds getting it to work properly. With the Rover/Buick engine, someone else has already done the expensive and hard development work and you can just go out and buy as many horsepower as you want/can afford! Steve |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 20, 2016 21:19:56 GMT
|
Oh, I know Steve - which is why I said especially if they've some miles on them. Number of RV8s I've seen with duff carbs, lobes wiped off the cam, cylinders down to single-figure PSIs, etc... yet they're still considered to be (comparative) balls of fire based on their cylinder count alone!  |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 21, 2016 22:25:12 GMT
|
|
The Carledo was going to have a Rover V8 in it's original planning stage. Then I bought the car, got it home, pulled and sold the original running gear and bought a V8. Pulled from a running series 1 Landy It had a DGAS Weber, remote oil filter and Lumenition, all for £130 - bargain! But it was still at heart a P6 engine and therefore not particularly well supplied with horses. And a few minutes with a tape measure convinced me it was gonna be a be-atch to fit in the Toledo shell. Nowadays I know it can be done and I have seen several cars thus converted. But reports from their owners/builders seem to say the same things, extended build times, lots of problems, skull sweat and expense fitting and a not too clever car at the end, with less power than anticipated and clumsy, nose heavy handling. On a whim, I offered the Carlton engine that I had "lying around" into the hole and it missed every significant obstacle. The rest, as they say, is history! And probably only about 20 BHP less than the Rover unit but a lighter unit (the Omega box is tiny) in a better location (further aft)means it corners brilliantly and AVERAGES 36mpg even with my lead wellies on. The only regret I have is that I don't have the V8 burble!
Steve
|
| |
|
|
)...
I think I really need to start working on SWMBO (who really doesn't like them 
) Waht are they like to drive?
