A Triumph TR8 driver aiding a new Volvo owner in distress is not a roadside scene that one expects to see in 2019. The TR8 lasted from 1978 to 1981, with convertibles produced in 1979-81, so this TR8 convertible is 38 to 40 years old, with at least 35 years of age and wear and tear more than the silver Volvo. The man with the Bordeaux Red sweater is no doubt aware of the irony of the situation, seeing that he is detail-conscious enough to match his clothes to his car and shod his TR8 with stylish Minilite wheels.
Funny, my opinion is mixed here.
If you accept help a triumph, what’s the odds that it too will break down? On the other hand anyone who can keep a LBC running and on the road is clearly a better mechanic than me, so you should accept their help.
I’d far prefer roadside help from a TR-8 driver (or any other English sports car) for a number of reasons:
1) Just the act of owning a TR-8 indicates a better understanding of automotive tech than the typical Camry/Accord/Fusion owner.
2) Over time, they’ve developed a number of strategies to deal with roadsides issues. That may take the form of a tool box in the trunk, or their favorite tow truck driver on speed dial, but they are ready for the unexpected.
3) Since they’re driving the TR-8, they have an open schedule. They have budgeted time for an unexpected delay, be it their own issue or just stopping to help others.
4) If there’s a lengthy delay waiting on additional help, we can avoid religion or politics, and just talk cars!
I’m familiar with this car — and in fact caught up with it in a drugstore parking lot a few years ago. Well, unless there’s another TR-8 with Minilite wheels running around Northern Virginia.
I took pictures of it, but never got around to writing an article about it. The car is in beautiful condition. I’m glad to see it spends some time doing roadside assistance!
And here’s the interior, in all it’s plaid-upholstered glory:
Always thought that was a remarkable modern dash for its time.
We seem to see many of Northern Virginia’s most interesting cars. I recall us both also writing about the same Datsun 200SX.
Yes… and a ’72 Coupe deVille at one point too.
Would love that TR8… Have owned Audis, and have restored Thunderbirds. So I am used to the adventure.
It’s a shame these were not vary good cars, for I liked the styling and all, but pretty much everything I read about them back then was negative.
If that was in the UK, it’s much more likely to be a TR7. Unless it’s got 8 cylinders. Which would be pretty rare.
At least here in the US, TR-8s were TR-7s with Rover V8s fitted. I don’t believe too many were made…
Its a little more than that. They also had power steering, revised rear axle ratio, up-rated suspension and brakes. The rear axle and transmission of the early TR7s was also on weak side but improved after a few years. The TR8 uses the improved items.
The stout and reliable V8 solved the TR7s biggest issue – weak and often troubled engine.
https://www.curbsideclassic.com/blog/history/cc-history-triumph-tr8-the-wedge-perfected/
An excellent example of the lesson “Newer isn’t always better.” I have a feeling by the time my Ranger is used up (which shouldn’t be for quite a while) everything else now will have long succumbed to spare parts & scrap metal. The increase in electric vehicle manufacture & usage will only increase this likelihood as everything becomes outdated & gets replaced by newer things; in spite of that, a basic simple design like that of the outgoing Ranger that had a long original production run should continue being easy to service & maintain because of the proven technology & still-huge popularity.
The TR-7 was a huge disappointment to me when it appeared on the scene. Although I was already an Alfa Romeo guy, I always had a bit of a crush on the MG-B and a huge ah, desire for aTR-6. I still remember the first time I saw one barking it’s way down a city set, looking so damn right. I still about think that, and sometimes muse about the idea of a TR-6 body on a BMW Z, replacing that old British straight-six with a German one.
But the TR-7? You lost that straight-six for a less powerful four. You lost the IRS for a solid axle. British Leyland’s bad quality was already infamous, and the sadly TR-7 didn’t improve that reputation. It doubled down on it.
Worst of all it was UGLY. I don’t mind the wedge nose (it was indeed the shape of things to come) but the squared off roof doesn’t match up. Then there is the odd upswept accent line along the side which makes the rear of the car look jacked up, especially with the tiny looking wheels. Bah. Fiat 124, Alfa Spider, Porsche 914, Fiat X-19, Jensen Healy, MG-B, 240Z, Celica, or a TR-7? Or, for that matter, a used TR-6?
The TR-7 convertible did look a lot better, and, in hindsight, the TR-8 convertible was a nice car. However, there was no way to know that at the time. It was pretty clear that BL was in a death spiral, and it took a brave buyer to gamble his money on a TR-8. It sounds crazy to say aloud, but an Alfa was a better bet.
As others have said, if the TR-8 convertibles had appeared first and with the quality they proved to have over later years, perhaps Triumph’s fate would have been different. *
*Oh wait. I forgot the Triumph Stag. A totally clean slate car, with a newly designed engine, and truly beautiful. It was a freakin’ disaster. So, probably there was no way to save British Leyland.
I can’t help but wonder if Giant Man is actually photographing her insurance details after a minor prang.
Yeah. It looks like both cars have damage to the front end on the driver’s side. Odd.
Hard to tell what’s happening but it doesn’t say “roadside assistance” to me.
Classic British cars always having to bail out that flimsily-built Swedish stuff…
Just yesterday I saw a Dolomite Sprint jump-starting a new Avalon.
Here in opposite-world…