Why Triumph over MG?

RJS · Postby **RJS** » 14 Jul 2009 22:35

After we were teasing Tim a few days ago about MGs, I got curious to why we all love triumphs and not MGs?

Me personally: I had a cousin I looked up to that had a TR6 when I was about 14, and I thought that car was terrific. I also knew 2 cute girls when I was in high school that had MGs. I know it is just because of my experiences, but I have always felt that Triumphs are a guys car, and MGs are a more feminine car (sorry Tim).

What about everybody else?

Rob

PeterTR7V8 · Postby **PeterTR7V8** » 14 Jul 2009 23:42

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by RJS

MGs are a more feminine car<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

You've never had a Herald! But I take your point & agree that the TRs have always been more manly than MGA/B & C. The original design spec for the TR2 dictated that it was possible to touch the ground with the doors shut so there is a definate knuckle-dragging attitude to the TRs.

MGs are too namby pamby for me. They don't have enough character & don't have the sense of adventure (or desperation) that Triumphs have. If you look at the MGB, it was a failry minor evolvution of the MGA & then it was produced from '62-'80 during which time Triumph had the TR4, TR4A, TR5, TR250, TR6 & TR7 & had a full range of other cars as well. MG never had any desire to explore beyond a very basic style & most other MGs during that time were rebadged versions of other maker's cars. Triumph never rebadged anything (don't mention that Honda) so it gives the marque more integrity.

But the No.1 main reason why Triumphs are better than MGs is - Triumphs won more races.

Never say die. At least not while you're still breathing.

zekow1 · Postby **zekow1** » 15 Jul 2009 00:18

When the miatas came out i thought of the MG's
To Me They Look fragile, simple.
Tim Keep the TR ,sell the Miata.
there is more money with the Mg's,
[:D] but not as much happiness as our tr's

silverseven · Postby **silverseven** » 15 Jul 2009 00:48

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by RJS

I got curious to why we all love triumphs and not MGs?......but I have always felt that Triumphs are a guys car, and MGs are a more feminine car (sorry Tim).
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by zekow1

When the miatas came out i thought of the MG's
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

so if MG's are femine, what are Miata's (hehehhehehehheh [:o)]

Ron.

bottomtop · Postby **bottomtop** » 15 Jul 2009 00:50

I was actually really torn when purchasing between the Wedge, which I had wanted from age 15, and the BGT which I had only recently acquired a taste for. I think I've got a soft spot for the B and the BGT and probably always will. I also happen to think that the MX5 / Miata is bloody good car!

Rich in Vancouver · Postby **Rich in Vancouver** » 15 Jul 2009 02:36

I currently have one of each. Both of mine are decidedly masculine. The MG is a supercharged ZA Magnette with crank-fired ignition and 4 wheel disc brakes. No gender issues there! [:D]

Cheers,
Rich

1975 TR7 ACL764U

jclay (RIP 2018) · Postby **jclay (RIP 2018)** » 15 Jul 2009 02:56

I think that we are comparing apples to oranges here. It is just what you like better.

Tim makes a lot of things for the MG, so I can see why he would keep the car.

The AH Sprite Mark II come out before the MGB, and if you look at it, the design is just a lengthening and front end refinement. The MGA was a reflection of the times in England with a lot of it's styling coming from the XK 120, 140, 150 Jaguars.

The MGB was a triditional design of the times in terms of construction and styling. The TR7 was a complete departure from the previous TRs.

Unibody, much wider, roomy interior, A/C, and an extremely different styling. I fell in love with it the first time I saw one, but I was not a Triumph fan before that, really didn't know they were around. I was always look at the Jags and the Big Healeys, so my tastes were not tinted by the previous TRs.

I can understand why the older TR owners don't care for the TR7s, they are just to conservative and stick-in-the-muds to accept something better. Heck, I am surprised that they are even using computers! But, if they ever drove one, they would change their minds.

jclay

[url="http://web.mac.com/jclaythompson/iWeb/Site/Welcome.html"]My Triumph Site[/url], [url="http://web.mac.com/jclaythompson/iWeb/Technical/Intro.html"]Technical Stuff[/url], [url="http://homepage.mac.com/WebObjects/FileSharing.woa/53/wo/HJMTK8gsojtwKleP.1/0.2.1.2.26.31.97.0.35.0.1.1.1?user=jclaythompson&fpath=Triumph_Articles&templatefn=FileSharing4.html"]Download Page[/url]

Hasbeen · Postby **Hasbeen** » 15 Jul 2009 05:02

The MG B was the best sports car ever built in the UK, if you
consider the reason companies build cars. Most sold, longset
production run, stuff all extra expence in development, & many
people love them, so it was all good.

However!

The B came out just after I had taken delivery of my new Morgan +4.
Compared to that it was a wimpy, gutles saloon [Morris Major in Oz,
Woolsey 1500 in UK], that had driven under a truck, & lost it's roof.

I had thought the A was a big step down from the TF, but the B was
going just too far, for me. I didn't have much time for the TRs
either.

The worst thing about my Morgan was the Triumph/Vanguard/Fergy
tractor wet sleeve [TR3A] engine, so I was not a Triumph lover
either, until the 5 came out. Just why I thought the B looked like a
topless saloon, & not so the TR5, I really don't know. Perhaps the B
had prepared the ground for the less hairy chested sports car.

What ever, I have never wanted one, but would happily drive a
Sunbeam Rapier convertable, [Hillman Minx type] if I could find one,
which shows how lacking in rational thought, is my choice in cars.

Rich, you had better make sure you have good locks on the door to
that Magnette, if ever I get to Canada. I would really love that.

Hasbeen

FI Spyder · Postby **FI Spyder** » 15 Jul 2009 05:35

While the MGTC was the classic sportscar shape we all saw on many a WWII film driven by the dashing fighter pilot hero and the MGA was the classic post war English sportscar shape, the MGB was just bland. Always thought so when they were current, still do.

The TR2 and 3 blew away the MG's on the track (according to excerpts by British sportscar magazines of the day). Triumph was about racing from it's over all team win at Lemans 1961 (beating Ferrari, Maserati and Jaguar) to it's dominence in 1980 with the TR8 (or TR7V8 if you want to use their marketing's slant on it). I Liked the TR3, TR4/5 was getting a bit too civilized and TR6 getting more plain (even though my cousin had one.) Then the TR7 blew me away although the roof line left me a with mixed (confused) feelings design wise.

And the way the hood on the Spitfire lifts up, way cool (just like a Jag,) The GT6 even had the nickname "the poor man's Jag. (just like me).

While the MG had it's racing triumphs (excuse the pun) like it's win at the 36 hours of Nuremburg it was more about living off it's pre war rep.

TR7 Spider - 1978 Spifire - 1976 Spitfire - 1988 Tercel 4X4 - Kali on Integra - 1991 Integra

John Clancy · Postby **John Clancy** » 15 Jul 2009 07:53

Triumph produced better specification cars than MG and were better looking too. I like MG's but they're just not in the same league as Triumph. And Triumph have a far more interesting history and pedigree too.

Take a look at the pre-war cars which Donald Healey was largely responsible for. The Dolomite Roadster was built into 1940 (after the company went bankrupt) and along with the Dolomite Straight 8 has to be one of the most beautiful cars Britain ever produced.

Healey and other senior Triumph personnel designed a new car during the closing days of World War 2 but Thos. Ward & Co. who now owned the Triumph name weren't interested so he went off and did it himself. So you could say even the big Healey was a Triumph in all but name.

<center>[url="http://www.triumphtr7.com/documents/sales/codenamebullet.asp"]Buy the story of the Triumph TR7/8 on DVD here[/url]</center>

Spectatohead · Postby **Spectatohead** » 15 Jul 2009 09:17

I tend to agree with the masculine/feminine TR/MG split. Someone else mentioned that MG started down this road with the MGA and just continued with the B. MG's of the '60s on seemed to be heavier and more underpowered to me. Triumphs always seemed more sporting, even the early 7 coupes which were definitely a bit underpowered seemed more sporting. If BL had been clever enough to release the car with the 3500 engine to begin with the marque might still be around.

The MGs were just "cute". When I was in the Air Force a friend of mine had a "Spridget", he hated me calling it that. I went to his house one day and parked next to the "Spridget" and his wife came out and saw the 6 and said "Your car is so big". He'd go on about the MGC he used to have and how he'd eat TR6s for lunch, ha. I have always owned Triumphs, my first car was a '62 Spitfire with a '65 MkII driveline and gaping rust holes in the body. I also had a '68 MkIII Spit, a '69 TR6, a '71 TR6 (with OD, wire knockoffs, and hardtop), and a '80 TR7 before being non-Triumphant for 10 years.

I recently found my holey "I'd rather push a Triumph than drive an MG" T-shirt. It seems to have shrunk, as have all my other T-shirts from the day. My 18 year old son is now wearing many of them, they are older than he is. Too bad he decided he likes Saabs. I am just about ready to hit the road with the TR8 in all of it's ugly glory. Hopefully it won't rain as I don't have a serviceable top yet.

'80 TR8
'97 Maxima 5spd

andyf · Postby **andyf** » 15 Jul 2009 09:58

I prefer Triumphs over MGB`s generally because Triumphs tend to be more "sporty". Having said that, I owned a Midget when I was (much) younger as well as a Spitfire, and can honestly say that I like both marques.

I find the t-shirts an enjoyable bit of rivalry and fun, no matter which "way round" they are. But what I find sad is that there are many people that believe them and think if you drive Triumphs you must hate MG`s and vice versa, we`ve all come across it.

I fail to understand this, why not support all marques of classics, or at the very least respect other peoples views? I routinely wave at other classics when out in the 7, even if I don`t like the cars personally as I think it is good to see other models preserved.

1980 persian aqua DHC

trphil · Postby **trphil** » 15 Jul 2009 10:48

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by andyf

I routinely wave at other classics when out in the 7, even if I don`t like the cars personally as I think it is good to see other models preserved.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Me too but the result is sometimes unexpected, I had a TR6 driver give me "the finger" once for daring to wave at him!

Underdog · Postby **Underdog** » 15 Jul 2009 13:57

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Originally posted by PeterTR7V8

[quote]Originally posted by RJS

MGs are a more feminine car<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

If you look at the MGB, it was a failry minor evolvution of the MGA & then it was produced from '62-'80 during which time Triumph had the TR4, TR4A, TR5, TR250, TR6 & TR7 & had a full range of other cars as well. MG never had any desire to explore beyond a very basic style & most other MGs during that time were rebadged versions of other maker's cars.

But the No.1 main reason why Triumphs are better than MGs is - Triumphs won more races.

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

Yes and not until the TR7 did Triumph come up with a unibody. All the predessors were built on the same basic frame layout with different sheetmetal. I like how some say the Trs are more "hairychested" or manly. I say they are nothing but more crude and unrefined. I've driven several good examples of TR6s and my friends TR4. None have the feel of my MGB. Uncomfortable, stiff clutch, all the panels rattleing about. Ironicly, given the TRs always boasted more power, they are built much weaker than a B. Hubs, flywheel bolts, wheel studs...it seems everything is one size smaller. However, the biggest advantage to an MGB is the unibody construction. The body assembly is quite rigid, actually a bit overbuilt. This results in an all of one piece feel and helps greatly with handling. In comparision, the early TR range feel like a haywagon with body panels attached and running gear from a tractor.

As far as racing. Today in Vintage trim, I don't see many TR4s beating the MGBs...at least not over here. They may have more power but are no match in handling.

72 MGB BRG
80 TR8 Persian Aqua
If women don't find you handsome, they should at least find you handy.

Mowog73 · Postby **Mowog73** » 15 Jul 2009 14:02

<blockquote id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">If you look at the MGB, it was a failry minor evolvution of the MGA & then it was produced from '62-'80 during which time Triumph had the TR4, TR4A, TR5, TR250, TR6 & TR7 & had a full range of other cars as well. MG never had any desire to explore beyond a very basic style & most other MGs during that time were rebadged versions of other maker's cars. Triumph never rebadged anything.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">

The TR4 to TR6 are almost the same cars. You don't think that the guys at MG would have loved to have replaced the B with another car after 4 or so year?

I agree with andyf; that the rivalry between the two is quite silly; better support all marques of classics, and be glad that we still have choices of classics.

Mark

1973 MGBGT Teal Blue
1976 TR7 Mimosa
1980 Spitfire 1500 Vermillion

Anonymous

Why Triumph over MG?

Why Triumph over MG?

Who is online