========================= ROTOFLEX =======================
Using only my personal experience as a basis for saying this, I
venture that the Rotoflex couplings used on GT6+ and early Mk.
III are as sturdy a part of the drivetrain and suspension as any
other part. I bought KC75121L (a VERY
early 1970 -- built in August 1969) used in October 1975. The
car had about 18,000 miles on it and was quite original, if not
too well cared for cosmetically or otherwise. The car was used
daily and year-round for the first two years; after that it was
used only a little less often and not much at all in the winter
until 1981, when I stored the car, contemplating a future
restoration. OK, IT RUSTED AWAY! GEESH! WHADDAYAWANT? I WAS
YOUNG! WE GET WINTER HERE IN NORTHEASTERN NY! MY DOG ATE THE CAR
WASH SPONGE!
Sorry about that. ;-)
Anyway, use of that car included probably 35-45 autocrosses
(standing, wheelspin starts for the most part) and a dozen or so
TSD rallyes in addition to commuting, et. al. During the car's
entire career -- a total of some 65,000 miles in my hands -- the
original Rotoflex couplings outlasted a clutch, a differential,
rear suspension bushings, a couple of U-joints, a broken inner
axle caused by sudden failure of one of the U-joints, and lots
of levering on a Rotoflex to line up bolt holes for the
replacement axle. There were times when I would look at the
dried, split, separating rubber pieces and say to myself *I
should replace them.* But, I never did.
In summary, I'd stay with this setup for the GT6; it's far
superior to the original swing axle setup, better than the
*swing-spring* of later cars, just as durable as any, and a
Buick-owning neighbor once commented to me how good a ride it
provided!
As always, YMMV.
Andy Mace, curator
Triumphs 'R' rUSt Museum, Hoags Corners, NY, USA
================================================================================
|