How A Triumph Heart Transplant Saved TVR (Part 1)

Two British sports cars, one engine and one crucial export market. We compares Triumph’s TR6 to a car that it helped make possible – the TVR 2500M.

Trace the history of any car that was exported to the USA through the 1960s and ’70s, and it doesn’t take long to notice the effects of America’s new-found passion for legislation. The country may have loved British sports cars and British manufacturers loved to boost their bottom lines by providing them in quantity - but, all things considered, those making the rules would rather that they were a bit safer and a bit less polluting.

California led the way in declaring war on exhaust emissions and, where the Golden State went, so the rest of the country followed. This forced car companies to start the process of cleaning up their act, which was fine if the company in question had the necessary where­withal to implement the changes. It was also acceptable if you were a smaller firm that relied upon the bigger boys to supply major compo­nents: they soak up all the R&D costs, you buy the resulting emissions-compliant part off the shelf. Thus was the marriage arranged between Triumph and TVR.

Triumph’s TR6

In the opinion of many American commenta­tors, the TR6 was the car that the short-lived TR250 should have been. The latter known on the home market, of course, as the TR5 - featured Triumph’s 2%-liter six-cylinder engine. This was a stretched version of the smaller power plant found in the 2000 saloon, and was deemed to be more suitable for the marque’s sports-car range than the rough but reliable ‘four’ that had been used up until that point.

At first, the updated unit refused to give the power figures that Triumph was hoping for. The initial output of 94bhp was, in fact, 9hp less than the engine it was supposed to be replacing. Different cylinder-head designs were tested with limited success. The final answer came in the form of Lucas’ fuel-injection system. With this fitted, the ‘six’ immediately gave 150bhp.

Triumph’s TR6 - back

That took care of the UK market, but it was Triumph’s American dealers that were really crying out for the new model and that presented something of a problem. In fuel- injected form, the engine failed to meet those tough new emissions regulations, and there were also rumors that Stateside distributors were reluctant to embrace the potentially trouble­some and costly new technology. As a result, cars for the all-important North American market had to make do with twin Stromberg carburettors and only 104bhp.

The TR250 was well received, however, and that provided the impetus for the TR6. Triumph was a little short of cash at the time, and Michelotti’s suggested design for the new model was prohibitively expensive. Enter German company Karmann, who offered to swallow the price of the necessary tooling and carry out a budget facelift to give the latest TR a distinct identity to go with the six-cylinder engine.

The result was, if you’ll pardon the pun, a triumph of clever, expedient design. With the center section of the car being the most costly to rework, Karmann’s Gerhard Giesecke left that area alone and concentrated instead on a ‘top and tail’ approach, endowing the TR6 with an aggressive new front and a Kamm-style rear. Car and Driver said that the model was ‘a member of the family and instantly recognizable, but it’s a little like being introduced to a strikingly hand­some daughter in a family of very plain, very earnest people you have known for ages’.

TVR 2500M

That’s somewhat unfair on the TRs that went before, but there is no doubting that the TR6 is an effective-looking machine. With the head­lamps moved to the outer extremities of the front end and a more shallow grille filling the space in between, it’s bluff and aggressive. Although it’s a little slab-sided in comparison with the TVR, its proportions are far more pleasing, with the wheels perfectly filling the subtly flared arches (to accommodate the slightly wider 5 '/2m rims) and a boot that was bigger than on the TR250 but more awkward to access.

Triumph went through a phase of giving its sports cars offset driving positions, and the TR6 is no exception, with the pedals being positioned considerably right of center. While it’s narrow inside, you don’t feel as hemmed-in as you do in the TVR and, even though the switchgear is obviously and necessarily recognizable from the rest of the Triumph range, it’s a pleasant, traditional-feeling interior.

Owner Peter Christie has adapted a BMW windbreak for use in the featured car, which helps to reduce buffeting, something that was noted when the model was new. ‘Smoking a pipe,’ wrote Road Test magazine, ‘is apt to send hot embers swirling in all sorts of unexpected directions.’ Not a problem, you feel, that young journalists have to concern themselves with in the latest crop of modern sports cars.

Christie’s Triumph boasts an especially sweet engine and, having driven only injected TR6s in the past, I’m struck by the smoothness of this particular carburetted example. It revs without the slightest hint of a cough or hesitation and, while it lacks the outright pace of the 150bhp UK version, it still pulls well - even on the ups and downs of a Dartmoor B-road. And then there’s the noise. Few configurations offer the aural range of a straight-six. From a bass growl at idle to a crisp bark when it is at the upper reaches of its rev range, you simply never tire of it.

TVR 2500M - back

The folk at TVR certainly recognized its abilities. Martin and Arthur Lilley had rescued the ailing firm in November 1965, and the first new model was the MkIV Grantura 1800S, which used BMC’s B-series engine. Then came the Tuscan with either V6 or V8 Ford power and the Vixen range. The first use of Triumph’s 2¹/2-litre straight-six in a TVR had links to both of those models. After the V6 Tuscan had fallen foul of US emissions legislation, the Blackpool firm realized that the TR6’s carburetted unit was the ideal answer for the crucial export market. It was initially fitted to the Vixen and shown at the 1970 London Motor Show.

The Vixen 2 500 would be short-lived, however. In 1971, TVR displayed the M-series prototype at Earls Court, complete with naked models (Helen Jones and Susan Shaw, in case you’re interested). This latest model replaced the Vixen and Tuscan, and went on sale in 1972. The Lilleys had streamlined the production process so that the M-series could be made in greater quantities than previous TVRs, and the car was based around a new chassis. Conceived by Mike Bigland, it combined square- and round-section tubing in a central-backbone layout that was stiffer and stronger than the previous frame. For the 2500M, TVR also made use of the TR6’s disc/drum brake set-up, plus its gearbox and front uprights.

The glass fiber body was made in-house by TVR and was bolted to the chassis in 10 places, while the styling was an evolution of its stubby ‘Manx-tail’ predecessors. A reshaped bonnet was necessary so that the spare wheel could be relo­cated to the engine bay from the rear luggage platform. This huge panel is fronted by an enlarged air intake (the engine had a tendency to run hot in the TVR) and features a scalloped top section that gives the impression of a central ‘bulge’. From there all the way back to the rede­signed rear, with Mk2 Cortina lights, it’s curvaceous and muscular, with great presence.