Triumph Sports Cars

Im thinking I might go to this frame and do V8. Looking for thoughts.

Tim

Tim,

I've known Ted for many years. Everything he turns out is top notch. If that frame had been available when I started the MGB V8 conversion, I'd be driving a TR6 now. Check out Van Wilder's TR6 with that frame (my old V8 conversion project): [www.britishv8.org]

Heard nothing but good things. Made the jump. I can't wait to unwrap it!




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/11/2014 02:31AM by bergstro.

Dean what make of Triumph is going to sit on this frame? Also what type of engine are you going to use?

Cheers
Byron

Nice...Wish I had that under my ride :-)

Very nice, Dean. I wish my car had a frame, period. : )

It's going under the sheet metal and glass that once belonged to a 1973 TR6.
It's going to be powered by an engine that is a Ford 2.3l turbo in name only. The head and shortblock (3 liter) are manufactured by Esslinger Engineering.
Since it's a little unusual, Ted Lathrop at Fastcars gave me a break on the price because I need to do my own engine and tranny mounts so I'm going to paint later.

Sounds very interesting!! I am sure that Ford 2.3 (in name only) is going to be a tire smoker. How much horsepower and torque are you expecting from this engine?


Cheers
Byron

Builder says long block should be fine to 600 crank HP on pump gas.
I will try to put on an exhaust and intercooler that won't get in the way.
The turbo is going to be somewhat limiting (EFR 7163 unless something better comes out); with 25 lb. boost, I figure about 400-450 WHP @ 6.5k and 400-450 Lb Ft. @ 3.5k.
Have a lot of work to do before I smell smoke that isn't welding flux.

Holy Shmaboly;
I'm all about "go big or go home"
But 25 psi through two valves on pump gas?
Hope you've got a blast shield between you and the engine.
400 - 450 hp works with the numbers but you're 3 feet into hell and dammed either way.
350 ish hp on pump gas @ 19 to 20psi is a better # to me. With a 3.0L 4 cyl. torque rules.
That gets you a solid, fast car that won't spray the neighborhood with expensive metal.
If you're racing then that's different. We can get you 1000 Japanese magazine hp easy.
Nitrous, Alcohol or something more exotic will get you there as well but the topic was pump gas.
Not my intent to be a wet rag but unless you're dealing with the mighty "B" cam lets be down to earth.

All hail the mighty "B" cam

Fred

I have been running a 2.3 L Turbo Ford at 25 PSI in a 72 TR6 on the street for about 8 years now. The previous 10 years I was running it at about 20 PSI. The last time on the dyno the car did 430 RWHP on pump gas. The car has about 60,000 miles on it. It is very doable and reliable. See the photo gallery and look for Dale Knapke.

The ridiculous lump of pig iron that is the Ford 2.3l engine block can take all kinds of abuse. I have been driving one for 20 years. The donor for the TR6 project was a Merkur XR4Ti. Stock bottom, massaged head, typical set of bolt ons, stock(ish) EFI pushed to the limit. That car ran a 13.0 @ 110 in the quarter, (trailing arm rear suspension was holding me back). I rattled it a bunch of times and there was one time I had a wastegate failure and drove it home with a few repeated overboosts. The only problem I ever encountered with the heavy mechanical parts was a lifter failure that was alleviated by a new cam and roller followers.

400 hp is not uncommon with stock block and internals. The Esslinger tall block has more material in the cylinder walls, and the rods will be Crower Billet HD. Given a suitable turbo, EFI and tune. 600 at the crank is totally reasonable.

How high does the 2.3 sit in the frame? I heard of people doing it but had to modify the bonnet to make it fit

Mocking up installation in the stock frame and standard ford 2.3l block, the hood closes but there is very little room between the throttle body and the hood. I think that with normal engine bucking, it will occasionally make contact. My plan is to rotate the upper intake to better address the inter cooler and in the process, I will make sure that there is enough room so no hood mod required.

I have the bottom of my oil pan even with the bottom of the frame. The throttle body does get close to the hood.. If you rotate the intake 90 degrees I would also lower it a little or angle it down some. Are you going to run a front mount inter cooler?

I have an AW IC that is going to be attached to the battery tray so the intake is going to rotate to the back. The slope of the hood should help and in the process it will be lowered some.

Dean, just curious, what do you consider very little hood clearance? I an at 3/4" - maybe 1" which I'm hoping is ok.

I had less than 3/4 inch with the upper intake in the stock orientation. It was measured by putting a piece of clay on top of the throttle body and linkage and putting the hood into place and seeing how much the clay was compressed.
- The throttle body is larger than stock and has cobbled together progressive linkage which pokes up a little higher than stock (the stock t-body has progressive linkage and this engine is touchy without progressive linkage)
- Engine position was mocked up but I believe that it would end up higher, not lower than where I had it for this measurement
- All this was done a couple months back so my memory isn't perfect

The stock orientation was designed so there would be a straight pipe from the turbo to the throttle body. Anybody with the energy to put one of these in a TR6 will also have the energy to rotate the throttle body to a more suitable direction for a proper intercooler, in which case the clearance issue can be resolved.

Now it's in the shop. Craftmanship is excellent. All of the mounting holes line up perfectly. At least 100# lighter, it turns out that it is also a bit stiffer than the stock frame.

3 jack stands: 1 on center of front crossmember and 2 on the rear shock mount crossmember. 40# of water in the bucket.
You will just have to imagine what the FastCars frame looks like in a similar rig.
Stock frame measured 542 (lb ft)/deg.
FastCars frame is 621 (lb ft)/deg.

It will be a lot stiffer than a stock TR6 frame. The biggest weakness of the TR6 frame is where the frame necks down like an hourglass in front of the rear wheels. This design flaw makes the TR6 frame subject to a lot of twisting which leads to: cowl shake, weakening and cracking the diff mounts, and combined with rust issues at the t-shirt the rear-end of the frame drooping causing the door gaps to go awry.
The Fastcar frame does not have this configuration so you are solving a lot of problems.
You made a good choice by going this route.

Cheers
Byron