The TR6 and Z interiors are vastly different, except for the basic layout
and features. The available gauges are the same, etc. But, the Z's
interior is a little more civilized. (Shhhh!) There is a neat little
lever between the seats next to the shifter that is the choke control, and
there is an indicator light to tell you when the choke is on. (I could do
without that one!) The TR6 choke pull knob is to the right of the console
on the dash, which is fine if it is right-hand drive, but Triumph didn't
alter the location of the choke for left-hand drive models, so it's a
little awkward at first. Interestingly enough, this seems to apply to the
four small gauges on the TR, also. I found that while driving, my right
hand, as it rested on the steering wheel at the proper 3 o'clock position,
would block the most important gauges... oil pressure and water
temperature. A little browse through some books, showed that right-hand
drive models had the identical arrangement, but the drivers' "inboard"
(left) hand didn't obstruct the view of those two gauges. So, I flopped
the four gauges, and now the oil pressure and water temperature gauges are
in plain view. Anyway, both cars are really quite comfortable, though.
The Z has a dead pedal, which I really like. I've always wanted to install
a dead pedal in the TR. The earliest TR6s had a foot operated dimmer
switch mounted to a bracket against the left side of the footbox, and I'd
bet that this bracket, less the switch of course, would make a perfect dead
pedal. (Sometimes referred to as a "Jesus pedal") I don't personally like
the door handles on the TR6. They are more difficult to operate than the
Z, whose door pulls are way down low on the panel, which is a really
unusual place for them, but your hand finds it quite naturally.
The rear suspensions are very much the same as well... both have IRS, with
the usual 6 U-joints. Incidentally, the Z's U-joints from the factory are
about $55 each! (I'm told that they are really engineered well, and can
last the life of the car, if driven properly.)
My Z needs 'em! The Z's axles are a little easier to remove... they unbolt
at both ends rather than at one end like the TR, where you have to withdraw
the halfshaft through the hub carrier housing in the trailing arm. The Z
doesn't have lever shocks, either, but rather Chapman struts. Struts are
harder to replace than those levers, though! The TR6's hub and axle is
located by a very substantial cast aluminum semi-trailing arm, and the Z's
by a large A-arm. The semi-trailing arm allows a little too much negative
camber, and also allows a little bit of toe change, which is not really
very good at all. The Z's A-arms shouldn't allow any change in toe, except
maybe that caused by just bushing deflection, and probably a more
acceptable amount of negative camber. The front suspension on the TR6,
which is more complicated, should be better than the Z's Macpherson struts.
We'd be splitting hairs, though. But for either end of either car, I
definitely recommend polyurethane or even delrin bushings, to eliminate or
severely limit bushing deflection, allowing the suspension to move through
it's proper geometry, etc.
One annoying aspect of the Z that I discovered concerns on e very mundane
and simple, but occasionally necessary operation... changing the headlamps.
Surely the Japanese could have come up with a better solution than this.
The headlamps are housed in a sheet metal surround that attaches to the
forward end of the front wing, and to the front apron, via several bolts.
With these in place it is only possible to adjust the aim of the headlamps.
To remove the headlamps, you must first remove the surrounds. Access to
the bolts is from underneath, through the wheel arch, so the bolts are all
covered with mud and road grime. On the TR6, of course, everything is
right out in the open. Quick and easy. You see, my philosophy is that
there are certain operations on a car that should never, under any
circumstances, take longer than, say, fifteen minutes to perform. Spark
plugs, oil changes, air cleaners, etc. It really galls me to hear people
who might own a Camaro with a V-8 joke about how hard British cars are to
work on, when it might take them a couple hours to change the spark plugs!
GRRRRR!
Another surprise with the Z is a second, electrical fuel pump. They call
it a "pre-pump". It resides at the rear of the car next to the fuel tank.
Immediately after buying the Z, I was having a fuel starvation problem
which did not show up on my test drives. It was really giving me fits.
The previous owner had just replaced the mechanical pump, and since I had
no knowledge of the pre-pump, I ruled the pump out as the culprit. It
turns out that the pre-pump has a filter in it, which of course should be
changed periodically, and when I removed the filter it was jam-packed with
crud. A new filter at the dealer was $6.50, and it only took ten minutes
to change, right in the dealer's parking lot!
As far as driving goes, it is a little hard to compare because my TR6 has
had a lot of improvements and modifications... the engine has 30,000 miles
on it, and has been balanced, bored out to 2571cc, an uprated cam, 9.5:1
compression, high performance valve springs, etc. But my 240Z has never
had an overhaul, and in it's current state of tune, it don't have the low
end torque and flexibility that the TR6 does. But, of course, the Z engine
really turns on up around 3000 rpm. It really does have much more power
than the TR up in that range. The TR6 engine is pretty much finished past
3000 rpm. The TR6 does pull strongly down low, and the Z tends to stumble
a bit. In a rare high-speed trial in the TR6, (Shhh!) the most revs I
could get in top gear with 100% throttle is only about 4800 rpm. (that's
110 mph) But the redline is not until 5500 rpm.
(The "uprated" cam in my TR6 is a "torque improvement" cam, which I'm sure
explains a lot of this behavior.) The Z is heavier than the TR6, at over
2900 lbs, to the TR's 2390 lbs., and it feels heavier and not nearly as
agile as a result. All that may change with proper attention to the
suspension. My TR6 has competition springs, polyurethane bushings, and all
the ball joints and track rod ends are all very new.
All in all, the two cars are two very different solutions to the same
problem, each coming up with it's own set of shortcomings and advantages.
The TR6 being a ragtop is worth a lot in my book, and although the lines of
the Z, (NOT designed by Pininfarina as I've heard rumored, but rather by a
consultant named Count Albrecht Goertz, with modifications by Datsun) are
very pleasing, the TR6 is still a knock-out by comparison. Too bad Triumph
didn't engineer a unibody version of the TR6 with telescoping shocks at the
rear and that same beautiful 6 cylinder engine under the bonnet.
--------------------------------------------------
So, that's it. Now that I've owned the Z for a little longer, I can now
say that it is NOT as comfortable as the TR6... on longer drives I get
cramping in my right foot because of the placement and action of the gas
pedal... no place to rest my foot, and I'm an average size guy! Hope you
all enjoyed it!
|