Thinking of buying one , what to look for

[Alec]

Hello Jonathan,

"it is not unknown for rainwater to penetrate into the box sections themselves..."

Especially if sill repairs have been done without accessing the front wing lower section as that section of the sill tends to rot and if the wing drain is still functioning, water just pours into the sill.
I'm not quite sure what advantage the engineers thought that channelling water into the wings gave, particularly as they were not that well protected internally?

Alec

[Jonathan Lewis]

I'm not quite sure what advantage the engineers thought that channelling water into the wings gave, particularly as they were not that well protected internally?

Hello Alec,

I'd imagine probably because it simply looked tidier than the alternatives... Similar solutions were used on other cars of the period also, though in a number of cases (Jaguar XJ, Triumph 1300/1500/Dolomite) you at least have removable access panels in the back of the front wheelarches to allow periodic cleaning/painting/rustproofing of the A-post cavity. I think that the TR4/5/6 bodies had proper drains using rubber hose sections at this point, but I might be wrong about that.

From a 2000 perspective, keeping the drain holes clear (beneath the front wing and along the lower inner face of the sill itself) and the inner wing and sill cavities well-protected with Waxoyl, Dinitrol or similar should at least minimise the impact of any water that does manage to penetrate.

Jonathan

[rusty pelican]

still having douts about this car , I emailed Yorkshire Triumphs last night but have had no reply , I may phone them , harder for them to avoid me this way

[kevinw]

I'm not quite sure what advantage the engineers thought that channelling water into the wings gave, particularly as they were not that well protected internally?

Hello Alec,

I'd imagine probably because it simply looked tidier than the alternatives... Similar solutions were used on other cars of the period also, though in a number of cases (Jaguar XJ, Triumph 1300/1500/Dolomite) you at least have removable access panels in the back of the front wheelarches to allow periodic cleaning/painting/rustproofing of the A-post cavity. I think that the TR4/5/6 bodies had proper drains using rubber hose sections at this point, but I might be wrong about that.

From a 2000 perspective, keeping the drain holes clear (beneath the front wing and along the lower inner face of the sill itself) and the inner wing and sill cavities well-protected with Waxoyl, Dinitrol or similar should at least minimise the impact of any water that does manage to penetrate.

Jonathan

TR6's definately have proper pipes to drain the water out of the plenum and as the centre tub section was derived from a TR4, no doubt theyand TR5's do as well. However, for some totally unfathomable reason, where the pipe goes into the heater plenum chamber, it pokes up about 1/4 inch above the bottom surface. So if the car is left parked outside on a level surface in the rain, the plenum fills with water and you get wet feet! And sometimes the pipes are a bit short, so the water can run down the wrong side of the wing. Mine was modified when restored, but it stil isn't perfect.

Kevin

[TedTaylor]

still having douts about this car , I emailed Yorkshire Triumphs last night but have had no reply , I may phone them ,

Keep a careful written record of any conversation if they agree to disclose what they did, but they would be within their rights to refuse because you were not the customer and would need clearance from the person who paid the bill. Have you asked the seller for details of what Yorkshire Triumph did?

You should be looking for info on what was replaced, whether panels, repair sections or patches, and what protection was provided to inside surfaces of panels (paint etc) and whether any wax (or similar) protection was applied.

Ted

[rusty pelican]

The person selling it is not the person who had the work done , my thoughts are this , its £1800 for a car moted and taxed til sept , Ive seen it and apart from the paints a bit iffy in places its solid , The person selling it has found Yorkshire Triumphs bill which was £2675.89 , He has read out some of it too me , they have changed both sills , bottoms of both front wings , repaired but not changed completely both inner sills ,replaced two rear arches , replaced two outriggers , moted it and some other stuff i cant remember , im guessing i could sort the drain holes out myself , im hoping one of you kind people can tell me where they should be or maybe photos , theres mots going back to 1973 and this ties in with 50,000 genuine miles , theres a green log book with it and shed loads of other paper work , engines been replaced , theres a plate on it somewhere which says as such , all in all apart from the iffy paint and the drainhole / jacking point it sounds a reasonable gamble , i think

[TedTaylor]

If they have cut off the bottom of both wings to do a repair it does look as though they have done the sills properly which suggests knowledge of how to do things properly .... but daft no jacking point! From your description it does appear as though it has been done quite extensively though without looking at it I would not make a judgement.

I would see if you can get it for £1500 to allow for the paintwork and the doubts over jacking points and drain holes (even though dps are sortable). What do others think?

Ted

[David Withers]

Good thinking, Ted. But I wonder if "bottoms of front wings" means exactly what it says, i.e. the actual bottom, rather than the lower outside-facing part that has to be removed to replace the sills?

My car has 100% original sills but in 1996 I needed to replace what might easily be described as the bottom of the wing, i.e. the largish deflector plate that sits under the wing drain opening.

What about the two other drain holes each side, the slit-like ones behind the vertical flange that runs along the bottom of the sill? Are they there, and not bunged up or welded over? These holes are situated about 3" and 20" from the rear end of the sill and hidden by the flange. This flange has two corresponding rectangular bumps formed in it which can be seen, or at least felt, without crawling underneath (if they are there!) and their presence would give an initial indication of whether or not the drain holes exist.

[sorbs]

I'd look at a few other 2000s as a comparison. It doesn't sound as if the one you're thinking of is too bad at all.

If the work looks good and makes the MOT man happy, at that price I'd just keep it rustproofed and not worry about it too much. depends if you're after a concours example or one which you can drive and enjoy.

It's best to prevent water getting into the sills by sealing the apertures at the base of the windscreen pillars. Solves 99% of the problem then! Most modern cars drain in exactly the same way as 2000s, it's just that their rustproofing is a lot better.

[Andy G]

at that price I'd just keep it rustproofed and not worry about it too much. depends if you're after a concours example or one which you can drive and enjoy.
.

Dave, I'd agree with Sorbs - and knowing what you're like - you're always after something to fettle. Let me know if you want me to fill it's cavities with Dinitrol. Just did mine with a large compressor and large magic wand arrangement. Should slow down the deterioration.

So does this mean you're going to start looking for period extras for the Triumph as well?

Andy