Hi, Bill.
I've had both; my GT6 was a '75, with the Rotoflex/wishbone rear end.
General impressions:
For
Good fun, head turner, lusty, generally easy to fix, parts availability fair
to good. Looker, quite pleasant to drive, esp. with O/D. 2000cc straight six
sounded wonderful.
Against
Tiny, Roto rear end gave odd handling unless in *perfect* condition, that
rear end a total bitch to work on (later 'swing spring' models were better.
Felt a lot less 'together' than a B (scuttle shake, creaks and rattles).
Trunnion front end needed very regular maintenance. Crank thrust washers a
weak point.
Hope this helps,
Dave H.
Can I Telework for you? See what I do, at...
http://www.angelfire.com/biz4/davtel/index.html
Troubled by a phobia? Know someone who has one? Go to...
http://www.psychomotor.co.uk
----- Original Message -----
From: Bill Holt <lbcholt@one.net>
To: <mgs@autox.team.net>
Sent: Thursday, July 20, 2000 3:26 PM
Subject: MGB-GT's vs. Triumph GT6's
> Looking for opinions . . . .
>
> I recently saw some Triumph GT6's at a Cincinnati-area British Car Day. I
> like the looks of the GT6's vs. the MGB-GT's. How do the two cars compare
> otherwise? I know the Triumph is a six cylinder car and I don't think
> there were as many of GT6's built as compared to the MG's. Outside of
> that, I don't know much (except that the GT6 Mark II's apparently are the
> best of the GT6 lot).
>
> I am not on the verge of making a purchase (yet anyway!). I'm just trying
> to figure out what's the difference between the two cars for future buying
> reference.
>
> If anyone has owned/driven both models, I'd appreciate your input about
the
> how the two cars compare.
>
> Thanks a lot,
>
> Bill Holt
> '73 MGB roadster
>
>
|