Vance Navarette wrote:
Incidentally, the factory
> offered a 285 degree cam in the PI models, but backed away from it
> because the car was deemed to be too 'beastly'.
Vance, as this list and triumphs@autox.team.net is widely populated by
enthusiasts who 'feed' on what the factory did - and why. May I (with
respect) correct your claim?
The original cam as fitted in the PI cars was to be found in the TR5. This
transformed its performance from something that could compete with an MGB
(TR4A) to something that was happy playing with Jaguar E Types and other
similar exotica. The TR6PI cars had a slightly tamer cam - and if I had my
old production notes to hand, I'd explain the differences.
The key problem with all the PI cars (TR5 and 6, together with the 2500PI
saloons) was oiling of the plugs in heavy traffic. Even the 132bhp saloon
car suffered these difficulties and it was only when Lucas refused to
undertake any further development work with the mechanical fuel metering
unit to reduce these general difficulties, that the TR6PI saw a 'pwer
reduction' to 125bhp from 150bhp. It didn't make all that much difference
from a driving perspective because the torque values weren't affected - but
the cam was substantially modified.
For the record, I run a 285 cam in my 2500PI saloon with NGK plugs up on
top. Plug fouling is barely an issue with NGK's and for the traffic-choked
roads of the UK, both in town and country, the 285 cam is by no means too
'beastly.' It's great to drive a 35 year old car that keeps up (and SHOWS
those self-satisfied drivers of current Audis and BMW's) and clean set of
rear tyres in the traffic lights Grand Prix!
Jonmac
|