On Tue, 18 Nov 2003, Mark Hooper wrote:
> Hi Robert:
Hi.
> Why would anybody bother fixing up a TR6 engine like this?
This is the sort of question to which there is no single, easy answer. But
in a vain attempt to shed some light on the issue, let's try this.
To some of us, the TR6 is the greatest car ever made. We take that a step
further by trying to prove it in competition. Granted, when these cars
were new, winning races meant that the factory would sell more cars. Now,
it's more a matter of pride in taking a 30 year old car and duking it out
with other similar cars. It's a real challenge to be competitive with any
30 year old car. Trust me on that.
> It is so
> far from stock that it has no LBC value.
I can offer a lot of snippy remarks here, but I won't. I will say "vive le
difference". Just because I get a woody looking at a TR6 that can top out
at 125 MPH on the back straight at Mid-Ohio doesn't mean that you have to.
Similarly, seeing lots of shiny TR6's lined up in a car show pretty much
puts me to sleep.
So - what's the "value"? The value is in how you use the car. If winning
trophies for "best wax job" is your cup of tea, great! I power-sliding
your TR6 through the esses at Lime Rock is your bag, kool.
> Is it just to keep the
> approximate look of the TR engine bay?
Well, some of us are bound to the TR6 engine block/head etc. by
competition rules. Nothing more, nothing less.
Some folks go nuts and put in V8's. That's kool, I can live with that. I
wouldn't put in a V8 - but I have appreciation for those that put in the
blood, sweat and tears to do so. But my rules don't allow this. So, I
leave no stone unturned looking for info on making the TR6 engine go
faster.
There's so much more to beauty than the "look".
For example - to me, it's a shame to put a valve cover on a GoodParts
roller rocker assembly. Those things are gorgeous to look at. But we have
to keep the oil in the engine, so...
> Why not just put in a new
> engine with correct management package and be done with it?
Sure, why not. Why not just buy a crate motor and install that?
The answer is that _to me_ it's kool to twist the key (or punch the
starter button) and hear that thing roar to life. Words cannot describe
the joy I feel virtually every time I do this.
> Of course
> I have no idea what would happen if you put a 400 hp engine in a TR6,
> but I'd guess it would blow every joint/gear in the drive train and
> turn the frame into a pretzel.
The answer is that there is no reason not to. And to the folks with a
penchant to engineering, an exercise in getting all the components to work
together is the challenge. It's all about rising to the challenge. In my
mind, to get 400 HP to work in a TR6 would involve 1.5" DOM tube and a
Ford 9" differential. That'd fix most of the problems you bring up.
:-)
> Anyway, not trying to bug anybody, just
> asking a question.
The answer is - "whatever floats your boat". Just be mindful that not
everyone has the same idea of "fun" with these cars.
To me, trying to build a car with a performance envelope similar to the
Group 44 TR6 is sort of a holy grail. I'll probably never get there, but
I'll have a blast trying. In other words, it's a totally irrational
persuit.
regards,
rml
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bob Lang Room N42-140Q | This space for rent
Consultant MIT unix-vms-help |
Voice:617-253-7438 FAX: 617-258-9535 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|