John, all TR's are "transition models." The acceleration and speed of the
TR4/4A'a DO "measure up." (0-60 in 10.5 sec for a TR4 is not anything to be
dismissed - according to some reports the TR4A is a little slower as is the
TR6). Remember that the UK TR6 was fuel injected with a 9.5:1 compression
ratio and the early TR6 US version was carbureted with an 8.6:1 compression
ratio. This meant that the US version TR6 was not that much different in
performance from the TR 4/4A/250's. In fact, the later US TR6's (in '74 the
compression ratio dropped again to 7.75:1) were no better in performance than
the TR2's of the '50's. (Piggott). The horsepower for the TR4A and early TR6
(US version) are the same - 104bhp net.
The TR4A has a completely different frame than the earlier TR2/3/4's. That
frame carried over to the TR6 and so did many of the body panels. (why do you
have those holes in your TR6 floorboards? The reason is that they are for
the TR4 jack.) Most US TR4A's also had IRS - but a non-IRS (called "live
axle") was available. - you need to check that.
Yes, as with any engine, you can beef it up by installing a different cam,
larger pistons and liners (the TR4/4A is a wet liner engine as opposed to a
cast block like the TR6) and a head rebuild. But IMO that is not necessary.
Drive it and you'll see. Somewhere you have gotten the wrong info on the
TR4/4A's. They are great cars. (And so is the TR6.) Cheers.
Art Kelly
In a message dated 21-Jun-99 21:33:54 Eastern Daylight Time, Johntr6@aol.com
writes:
> I'm a long-time 6 owner who is presently looking at a 65 TR4. Needs work
but
> not a total restore. Aside from the stylish Michelotti body, does anyone
out
>
> there speak strongly for this model? Some call it a "transition", and
there
> isn't much difference mechanically from the TR3's, is there? The 4
cylinder
> is nice and simple, but speed and acceleration don't measure up to
previous
> and later models, according to what I've read. Can one squeeze more
> compression from the block? Can it be made into a lively little car?
Any
>
> comments? John
>
|