| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Oz34
United Kingdom
2501 Posts |
 Posted - 12/12/2010 : 16:21:58
|
Not quite Triple M, but others who are also sufficiently sad may have seen the current incumbent of the Aidensfield Police house become the proud owner of a barn find TA on Friday.
If you didn't, & are not blinkered against T Types, it goes out each weekday evening on ITV3 at somewhere around 5. Given the reasonable degree of continuity recently, we may expect to see him tinkering in the odd episode this week.
Yes; definitely SAD,but it's something to record & play when SWMBO has finished with "Strictly"
Dave |
|
|
Bob Stringfield
United Kingdom
854 Posts |
Posted - 12/12/2010 : 19:59:37
|
| Isn't a TA a P-Type with a Morris Ten engine and a fat body? |
 |
|
|
Colin McLachlan
United Kingdom
988 Posts |
Posted - 12/12/2010 : 20:17:44
|
quote:
Originally posted by Bob Stringfield
Isn't a TA a P-Type with a Morris Ten engine and a fat body?
 
|
|
|
|
Oz34
United Kingdom
2501 Posts |
Posted - 12/12/2010 : 21:45:04
|
Maybe, but because of that fat body, it's not nearly as pretty! IMHO of course! And that Morris has p--- - ---s.
Dave |
|
|
|
ht1962
Netherlands
114 Posts |
Posted - 13/12/2010 : 09:25:07
|
Aren't all MG MMM models Morris offspring
And growing a fatter body over the years is also nothing new, it happens to the most of us and our cars
Regards,
Halbe |
|
|
|
Bob Stringfield
United Kingdom
854 Posts |
Posted - 14/12/2010 : 12:33:54
|
As my 'pur sang'-enthusiast friends often point out, MG was a vehicle assembler, rather than a maker, the manufacture being sub-contracted.
To be able to read an accurate technical study on how much of each model came from, say, Birmingham, Oxford or the Black Country and from which manufacturer would be fascinating, as would a list of potential 'donor' cars using parts common to MGs of the period.
The P-Type's Wolseley-made engine was, I understand, shared only with the Q- and R-Types, while other MMM engines were used in various MG models or other makes such as Morris or Wolseley.
The complaint against the TA's Morris saloon engine was that it was a pedestrian power-unit for a sports car. Indeed, in my youth, it was frequently pointed out that a well-sorted J2 or PA would comfortably out-perform any T-Type.
I am often wrong, but I am always faithful to MMM cars; friends have said that I should spend my time on a better make but I only have to glance at the PA in my garage to see why I do not.
Bob. |
Edited by - Bob Stringfield on 14/12/2010 12:35:52 |
|
|
|
John James
United Kingdom
960 Posts |
Posted - 14/12/2010 : 17:58:31
|
The previous post said:
"The P-Type's Wolseley-made engine was, I understand, shared only with the Q- and R-Types, while other MMM engines were used in various MG models or other makes such as Morris or Wolseley".
........but wasn't the Wolseley B4 engine the basis for all the Triple-M models?
Also said was:
"The complaint against the TA's Morris saloon engine was that it was a pedestrian power-unit for a sports car. Indeed, in my youth, it was frequently pointed out that a well-sorted J2 or PA would comfortably out-perform any T-Type".
.........but to quote from page 123 of 'The Magic of the Marque'
on the performance of the TA:
"In broad terms, the performance of the standard car was better than either the J or P-type...."
JOHN JAMES (Triple-M and T-Type owner) http://ttypes.org
|
|
|
|
Mike Allison
United Kingdom
196 Posts |
Posted - 15/12/2010 : 09:49:51
|
Taking my words in vain! So I feel qualified to say a couple of words here.
The TA had a 1292cc engine: bigger than the J and P-types, and bigger than the NA, at 1271cc, too! The NA was replaced with the VA, which had a larger engine again, at 1548cc. The NA would comfortably out-perform both the TA and the VA, which underlines my long held view, in direct contrast to the followers of the reverse gear programme on TV, that large engines are totally unnecessary to go fast. But then, I was following the example of the MG Company, who did more with less than 1100cc than many companies achieved with large engines.
One thing I have held for many years however, is that each generation of MG car was a better road car than its predecessor.
MAINTAIN THE BREED!
The clarion call of the Company.
I would add to this: they are ALL fun cars!
Mike |
|
|
|
tonym
United Kingdom
651 Posts |
Posted - 15/12/2010 : 16:25:56
|
Of course an N type would out perform a VA - it weighs about a ton and quarter against the N which weighs about ??
VA handling at slow speeds is horrid!
Tony |
|
|
|
Bob Stringfield
United Kingdom
854 Posts |
Posted - 15/12/2010 : 20:03:49
|
I have driven both the VA and its successor, the YA.
Fun with MG cars would seem to come in differing amounts.
|
|
|
|
John James
United Kingdom
960 Posts |
Posted - 15/12/2010 : 20:16:41
|
My previous post was merely intended to correct some inaccurate words concerning the performance comparison of J and P-types with the TA.
Relative engine sizes (and number of cylinders!) are, of course, relevant (as is any comparison with later T-Types with the XPAG engine)- but not to my post.
JOHN JAMES |
|
|
|
ags
United Kingdom
275 Posts |
Posted - 16/12/2010 : 00:53:38
|
Hi all,
I am going to go decidedly Off Topic here, but I do have some personal experience of the difference in performance between a well sorted (I hope) PB and a TA.
I say this because my big accident at Silverstone in 1977 was caused by overtaking a TA at Copse (old circuit). It was a handicap race and he had started at least one group in front of mine so that I had caught some time up on him. Unfortunately my then chassis set up meant that Copse was essentially one long understeering slide for me, and the car width I had to leave for him meant that there was not enough tarmac for me on the outside end of the corner. Aint hindsight a wonderful thing!
However in the hands of at least one fairly average driver a PB showed itself to be capable of pulling quite a lot of seconds back on a TA over the course of about three laps - say five miles. Plus of course the late and lamented Mike Hawke made mincemeat of me at the Club hairpin whenever we coincided there, even if I could get some of the deficit, but not all, back along the following Club Straight. So there is a little evidence concerning how well a PB and J2 can go. I tend to agree though that the T-types make more restful road cars as both J2 and P-type are more nervous in their handling, and the former especially requires quite a lot more concentration to drive.
Incidentally, my copy of 'The Magic' a first edition from 1972, does not even have any reference to TA performance in the captions on p123, so there were some revisions between editions.
As always, there will be different opinions in this discussion but Mike A's last few sentences say everything for me.
Andrew Smith - MMM571 |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Forum Locked
Topic Locked
