The Worst Engine Ever Made? - Triumph V8
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 сер 2024
- Hello! :D
Something a bit different this week. It's not often I talk about engines, but for a long time I've wanted to discuss the history of what is often considered the worst engine ever fitted to a production car, the Triumph V8, a protracted, yet somehow rushed, motor design that was unfortunately married to one of the most beautiful cars of all time, the Triumph Stag, this faulty powerplant subsequently dooming both car and company to collapse.
For a more in-depth look at the development of the Triumph Stag itself, I strongly recommend you watch Big Car's own superb video on this model at the following address:
• Why did the Stag FAIL ...
All video content and images in this production have been provided with permission wherever possible. While I endeavour to ensure that all accreditations properly name the original creator, some of my sources do not list them as they are usually provided by other, unrelated UA-camrs. Therefore, if I have mistakenly put the accreditation of 'Unknown', and you are aware of the original creator, please send me a personal message at my Gmail (this is more effective than comments as I am often unable to read all of them): rorymacveigh@gmail.com
The views and opinions expressed in this video are my personal appraisal and are not the views and opinions of any of these individuals or bodies who have kindly supplied me with footage and images.
If you enjoyed this video, why not leave a like, and consider subscribing for more great content coming soon.
Paypal: paypal.me/rory...
Ko-Fi: ko-fi.com/rory...
Thanks again, everyone, and enjoy! :D
References:
- Clayton Seams at Driving (and his respective sources)
- Wikipedia (and its respective references)
I owned a properly sorted late Stag in the early 1980's, it was so cool, totally reliable and with the best sound. When I sold it, I made a good profit.
Had Stag's been fitted with Rover V8 from its inception, I'm sure that it would have been a huge commercial success.
The choice not to use the Rover from the outset is baffling to me. The whole British Leyland story seems to be one of spite and willful refusal to take the easy choice.
@@Vespuchian I've likened this to when SAAB became part of GM, preferring to develop their own engineering and systems instead of using GM's, which seemingly led to their demise.
@@Vespuchian when the Triumph V8 was developed, they weren't part of BL the Rover V8 wasn't available to Triumph's engineers until the merger. BL was a marketing and management disaster so that was what sealed their fate.
Most would still have just rotted away anyway!
@@TheCyberSalvager GM bought SAAB for their engineering expertise, particularly their one coil per spark plug ignition systems and engine management electronics; they never had any real interest in keeping SAAB as a going concern. It is a prime example of asset stripping.
As a ex BL mechanic having worked on Stags I think this video is fair comment , however I believe the Edward Turner designed Daimler 2 1/2 Litre V8 should have been used , a reliable and sweet motor.
Yes a jolly good motor that one.
When a British car is said to be ruined by the engine, the engine must be the diabolical work of the devil considering all the other bad things of British cars!
They had V8s in Rovers didnt they? Why didnt they throw them in,they were buick v8s not them shitty things
@@dingdong2103 Better than a trabant and they were German or a Dutch made DAf and them rubbish things had a belt for a drive shaft!!
Driven a Daimler 2.5, nice engine but really lethargic
When Tony Hart set up business as a Stag specialist, he found Stag after Stag after Stag that was overheating was due to casting sand being left in the engine blocks from the manufacturing process, typical BL quality control! Washed out, and heads redone the cars would run fine. Of course since then Tony Hart as developed parts for the Stag to make the engine much better than what it was, including the use of a larger radiator, and electric water pump. Great video as always 👍
@@raypurchase801 Or just misunderstood by conventional mechanics?
@@raypurchase801 Stags had a pair of carbs, it was the 2.5pi that had injection.
@@EdgyNumber1 Was there ever a K-Series which didn't blow its head gasket?
Meanwhile, the old A-Series was great.
A Hart being a Stag specialist. Who would have thought?
@@raypurchase801 no, they were always on carbs. It was only the 2.5PI and the 6-cylinder TRs which had the PI
I had a friend with a Stag. He made some changes when he bought it, and avoided any problems.
From memory, he used a strong antifreeze/corrosion inhibitor mix, and assembled head bolts and studs with anti-corrosion compound. He made a big deal of double-checking for air in the system after filling and reduced all the service intervals out of caution.
Lovely car, mainly just needs a bit more TLC than average :-)
I ran my TR7 on 50% anti freeze never over heated did a head job on it after 15 years for fun and not a spec of corrosion.
I rather put ls motor on that thing than bothering to keep the engine
This care and maintenance is key… My stag had this care and attention through its life and is completely original and a lovely power unit that keeps up with modern trafic with panache
The head studs are a silly idea; although lube on them makes them ok; the factory couldn't be bothered doing that; hence they corrode in = give themselves a hard time. I removed mine as soon as I got it. Fitted high tensile socket head bolts = perfect. Never ever worry about them coming out. Car has done 350,000 kms in that config. Is the FIRST thing I would do, you will never regret it.
@@KJs581 But should a purchaser of a new car have to take those steps? The Stag had 2 classes of faults. The first class was the that of design faults, and there were plenty of those. In the second class, there were numerous instances of poor workmanship on the assembly lines.
To be clear, Triumph did fit the Rover V8 into the TR-7....the TR-8. It was a reliable and fast car, built until the fall of 1981. I own one.
Precisely!
By the time BL finally put in a V8 engine the TR7 had such a horrible reputation (well done Speke) that nobody in their right mind wanted to buy one and the high value of the pound against the dollar provided the final coup de grace. Michael Edwards had it put down and badge engineered a Honda into becoming the Triumph Acclaim 🤣🤣🤣🤣
From Leo: The TR8 is the only TR 7 chassis that did not have an Oscillation in the steering wheel right at 55 mph. I was a JRT trained mechanic and we spent hours trying to remedy with tyre balance, alignment and air pressure. Hard compound American tyres helped a lot. The TR8 models never had that worry. I often wondered if putting 25 kilos of weight behind the front bumper would have eliminated the shimmy.
@@barbmelle3136 Adding weight to fix squirrely handling was undertaken by Porsche, who sold a set of weights that fit inside the front bumper to try to tame the 911's strong tendency toward oversteer. :D
Love the TR-8 !! Had one myself ~ aquamarine green
I spent the first 4 years of my working life at a Triumph Stag specialist and still remember the engine well now some 35+ years later (you don't forget that one!).
It's far from being 'the worst engine ever made'. Many of it's issues came from production issues in that era of British Leyland. It just needed a bit of specialist knowledge to work on or the ability to read the manufacturers technical manual, a few little mods/refinements here and there and fixing some issues the striking workforce that built it should have done in the factory. Once fixed and with regular oil and coolant changes the Stag v8 is a reliable refined engine.
The Stag v8 was also an incredibly efficient engine of its time with the ability to return around 30mpg at legal speeds on a run, something Rover v8 and Ford Capri v6 owners could only ever dream of.
Many of the faults raised in this video I'd never come across and sound more like poor research and hearsay than fact.
'Worst engine ever made?' A strong contender for that accolade has to be the Ford Essex v4. These engines were designed too cheap, gave poor fuel economy and power and could shake themselves to destruction. Worst of all, some people actually replaced the Stag v8 with the Ford Essex v6 variant (better balanced than the v4 but still a rotten engine).
Thanks Mike.. I wholeheartedly agree with you as I am lucky enough to own a 30k mile unrestored Stag … It is lovely engine and I will run and saviour till I part from this world or the fuel runs out.. whichever comes first !
@@MrDodgedollar I'm sure someone will eventually mass market a fuel additive to allow classic petrol cars to run on alcohol based fuels so we can keep our heritage intact; much easier with diesels.
Better yet just replace it with a small block chevy. It's been the answer to crappy British engines for decades. This one would seem to be a prime canidate.
The Ford Essex V4 and the German Cologne V4 (used by SAAB) were not the same, the German one was slightly better, but both were not at all brilliant engines. They needed balancing shafts, but if the engine was at 90 degrees V they would not need one. Bad design.
@@michaeldose2041 Why not just buy an American car in the first place then you don’t have to scrape your bleeding knuckles changing the engine..? On second thoughts don’t answer that and go back to polishing your pistol
I had a 1971 2.5L PI and instantly fell in love with Triumph cars. 50 years on and I still think of that old car as the best car I've ever driven.
Beautiful cars
We have this great engine for the car, but let's develop a different one.
Nailed it..
Under British Leyland but Rover and Triumph operated as rivals.
@@martintaper7997 yeah.. I know. But which Rover range did the Stag concretely threaten? I'm not aware of a good candidate.
@@skuula The "engine" was competing via the engineers, not the car models. Also, did you not know the 3.0 V8 was destined to make a 3000 sedan which was a direct competitor to the Rover 3500 P6, and Triumph may have had plans of engineering the V8 for other car makers as well, as they did for SAAB. The other reason is that BL could barely meet the demand for the Rover V8. Leyland Australia made it's own 4.4 V8 using the Rover V8 as a basis, but they made a lot of changes.
that's emissions laws for you
My first car was a 75 Triumph Dolomite. It was the most fun car to drive I have ever owned but that engine was plagued by overheating problems. Spent a fortune on new radiators, fans, anything to cool it. Eventually it blew the head gasket and warped the head. Wasn't sorry to see it go to the scrap yard. It like the stag was a great car let down by poor engineering and obvious even worse management.
Hah yes the Dolly, shame the bodies were so crap or we'd see them more often on our roads today. Our female maths teacher drove a white Stag and what a beautiful model, car wasn't too bad either 😎
I had a 78 Triumph Dolomite 1850 for several years and liked it very much but have to agree about the overheating. Had one blown head gasket but got the cylinder head replaced. When the radiator leaked, I put in the Dolomite Sprint radiator which had greater cooling surface, but after that it tended to run a bit too cool - in winter I blanked off part of the radiator with cardboard and that solved it!
It would be worth a fortune today...
My Dol Sprint shared daily drive to work duties with my Stag from 2000 to 2013. I drove it once Perth/Melb return (7,000 kms) to get the manual gbox and all the bits that go with it for the Stag conversion from auto in 2003. Very long legged cruiser and surprised a lot of people in newer cars when it came to the overtaking lanes. Not many cars that old (mine 76) can sit on 130 kmh for 5 hours at a time crossing the desert. Only problems I ever had with mine was undoing wrong things people had done on it before I got it.
@@KJs581 Just goes to show what they can do when nicely sorted and well maintained, with the overdrive keeping the revs nice and low even when cruising at 130 kph / 80 mph. I got 6 years and 50,000 miles out of my 2nd hand 78 Dolomite 1850 and it was rust that killed it rather than the engine. Comfortable car and I liked the wood dash!
Owned a Stag for 10 years. Engine never missed a beat. Absolutely awesome sound of this V8 only bettered by a TVR 5.0 V8.
I was a mechanic during the seventies and eighties and spent many a frustrating hour trying to sort those things out.
I know what you mean. Trying to get the heads off with the head studs seized in was one of my biggest headaches.
Happy Days lol.
Where they carbs or mechanical fuel injection on them?
@@dukecraig2402 They had Stromberg 175 CD-II carbs. I worked on these piles of crap back in the day along with Jags & Daimlers.
@@nzsaltflatsracer8054
Yea, I know they're junk and can't hold a candle to the SU carbs, those things have the precision of a Swiss watch.
There is no finer carburetor that you can run on a Harley Davidson than an SU, they are absolutely without peer on one of them especially the older Harley's, they had ports from the factory that were too big and sloppy that hurt the velocity of the intake charge and the constant velocity principal that the SU's run on helped them out a good bit giving them much better throttle response, matter of fact the last style of carburetor that Harley used was a cross breed of the pervious butterfly style carburetor with the constant velocity principal of an SU, the idle and intermediate fuel circuits were basically the same as the previous Keihen butterfly carburetor but the main circuit was a constant velocity that took over just past idle.
Back in the day we used to scrounge through the junkyards looking for European cars that had an SU carburetor we could take off and adapt to a Harley, the prize being one of the 2" SU's from off of an E type Jaguar.
Nowadays a company called Rivera Engineering buys them new from SU and makes intakes and does the little adoptions needed to hook them up to one like what's needed to attach the throttle cables, the latter "Eliminator" style SU's that did away with the oil in the dome and replaced the bushing with a caged ball bearing assembly is fantastic, very little maintenance and no external fuel bowl that has to be rotated to run it level makes them the best and easiest version to put on one, there is just no other carburetor that runs like an SU on a Harley, they should have been putting them on from the factory.
@@dukecraig2402 The Stromberg CD's are actually a good carb, even the CD-II with the top adjuster, it's the rest of that Stag engine that's crap. When you want cheap 2" SU's get Rover 2000 TC carbs, they're a fraction of the price of Jag ones. I recently put 4 of them on a hot rod Buick straight 8 engine for a customer.
We had a 1973 Mk2 for 15 years never let us down.
Engine was rebuilt under warranty when it only had 2000 miles before we bought it.
Great car and happy memories.
Tripled in value during our ownership.
Sold it with 54k miles
Happy days
Can you begin to imagine if they had gone with the Rover V8 as standard fitment. It would have been one the best sports car ever.
What they did in reality was they gave Tony Hart a great business.
The whole history of British automotive industry is full of those what ifs. Great engineers with brilliant ideas plagued by poor execution it really is a shame
@@Thanos.m sounds like the French and their history with weapons. Fantastic ideas and innovations that they can't properly execute for whatever reason.
As I recall, they did eventually change the Stag over to the Rover 3500 - but it already had too much of a bad reputation to overcome by then.
@@bricefleckenstein9666 I thought that was the TR7
@@bricefleckenstein9666 No sorry. The Stag only came with its 3ltr Triumph V8 engine. There’s lots of debate about fitting the Buick/Rover V8 into the Stag back in the day with Triumph engineers saying it wouldn’t fit - which of course it can. The reality is somewhat different. An acquaintance with a Stag went out with Spen Kings daughter and when he asked him why he/ Triumph didn’t sanction the fitment of the Buick/Rover engine he replied that it was due to BL being cash strapped and the size of the additional investment required to increase production capacity for the Rover V8 engine to meet the anticipated demand for the Stag. That and it would have further delayed the introduction of the Stag which was already running two years behind schedule.
In a strange way that decision helped me - had they fitted the ultra reliable, infinitely tuneable Buick/Rover V8 the car would have taken the US by storm and they would be E-Type Jaguar money today and I would never have been able to realise my dream of owning one.
I’ve had mine 22 years now and she been very reliable and has never let me down. I still get a buzz every time I look at or drive her.
Bought a brand new one in Germany at NATO cars took it back after 3 months of total failure they paid me back and I bought the finest car made by BL the MGBGTV8 an absolute wolf in sheep's clothing and 30mpg cruised at 130mph on the autobahn fantastic !
Any one with the Buick/rover 3 liter or 215 were the greatest mix of style, engineering and reliability BL ever achieved.
That was a great combo - the MGB hardtop and the little Buick/Rover engine. Triumph finally got it all right with the alas-short-lived TR-8. :D
@@theeoddments960 It's unfortunate for GM that they had sold that engine off in the mid-1960s, it was a PERFECT fit in a Vega (via aftermarket conversion kit).
As an American, I'll say that that sounds like an amazing engine.
@@markhenry5294 it is an American engine
I owned a Triumph Herald(a subcompact) and the TR-7, both of which gave me insight into the cars and company. What you have to remember is that labor issues have been a fact in the UK forever. So, with a company with no concept of Deming's quality controls, an uncaring labor force, and manufacturing dyes and equipment from medieval times, it's no wonder quality was inconsistent...
You missed the actual root of the problem. Appalling MANAGEMENT.
I think the Oldsmobile Diesel V8 from the late 70s is worse. It set Diesel powered automobiles in America back for two decades.
Yes. A gasoline engine adapted to diesel operation was a Terribly Bad Idea.
@@keepyourbilsteins I read that a senior Oldsmobile engineer was sacked by the GM top because he warned about the exact same problems that would have occurred if they cut costs in engine development. I think the smooth brain bean counters who ran GM at the time thought that Diesel fuel was another type of Gasoline. These are the same twats who gave us the Cadillac Cimarron.
@@legiran9564 ❤ Cimarron! The snazzy Cavalier! Exactly what Cadillac buyers were interested in. 🤪
Oh you saw that repost of the 70s Malaise Era, part2 yesterday. Thanks for parroting what you saw recently. It helps the filmmaker... May as well source him
@@STho205 No I didn't. Multiple sources can come to the same conclusion. It's called "Intersubjectivity". Look it up. Truth hurts doesn't it? Stay mad bruh.
Back in the day a friend of mine had a Stag, he always drove it carefully and had me serviced it for him every 5K miles and over the space of 10 years that I know of, he never has so much as the slightest problem with it, he really worshipped that car and always kept it looking mint!
My sister owned one here in Australia and after much sorting out of the cooling system by her husband it handled the heat of an Aussie summer well .
In other words, your brother-in-law got it to the stage that the factory should have done in the first instance.
Some time ago, I watched a rebuild of the Triumph Stag.
The mechanic handling the rebuild was aware of the Stag's reputation, but couldn't believe an engine could be deigned so badly - in particular the cooling.
They went back to the original blueprints and discovered that the engines had never been put together correctly.
I don't know if this became common knowledge with the aficionados - but would encourage any owners to search for this programme.
Richard; The programme is “For the love of Cars” with Philip Glenister
The "Stag" was a victim of BMC's bad management, top brass with no industry experience, I as well as poor quality control (bad management). In my opinion, they had too many eggs in one basket, too many models, and not enough capital to do justice to any of them (bad management). I don't agree that the unions would have been a problem if there had been a good, well-trained management team. Remember a fish rots from the head.
Not to mention that England is full of lazy people who don't want to work. Yay socialism!!!
@@aborted4196 Balls, it is full of people. Those people like most can be led and motivated then work hard. However if you look at the UK the management is lazy and incompetent either pointlessly shouting at endless meetings, asking obviously dumb questions, refusing to buy the machines required or alter the design to improve things. Sometimes they do everyone a favour and go out and play golf. The pay in the UK is also very low compared to our competition, this leads to the situation of getting up every morning, doing long hours of repetitive work better done with automated tools or machines, then going to bed before repeating but finding yourself having to juggle which red letter gets paid every week as you sink further in to debt. I have just bought a bin made in Switzerland, they arent cheaper workers thats for sure but I couldnt find a UK made bin instead!
I think that the Unions had the management they deserved and vice versa. Together they killed what they loved most. I have worked in similar unionised environments and they were utterly toxic and destructive.
@@davehitchman5171 so explain the Sunderland Nissan plant? Is that just good management or do the workforce warrant some praise? The seventies was a dreadful time of mass psychosis not dissimilar to the event currently playing out. Both will have catastrophic consequences for manufacturing.
@@robinwells8879 The Nissan plant at Sunderland obviously proves that we have very good people in the UK. It shows what can be achieved with appropriate investment and good management. The issues in the 70s were about the right wing press and the poor management not working to agree reasonable recompense for the efforts of the workers and probably quite a bit of Russian and similar trouble making in the mix. If by the current event you mean the fact we have left europe then the effect of that can be either a catastrophe if the government continues the civil service buy foreign at any price as long as we dont buy British policy (which has been going on for more than 40 years and has destroyed all our major industries one by one) or whether it changes policy and does what Germany, France, Italy, America, China and pretty much every other nation in the world does and understand that buying local is cheaper in the long run as it supports companies which provide employment. There is no such thing as a non German car in the German police or a non French one in the French police, the reason is simple and correct, buying from your local manufacturer provides them with significant orders and income. We have new van manufacturers in the UK building electric vans, it will be interesting to see if any UK council or police force supports this by buying from them, or whether they stab this new industry in the back and continue buying foreign. Sadly I suspect the latter
Having worked on both the Stag and the TR7, I can agree with the names assigned to them by mechanics. The "Slag" and the "TR Lemon."
Laughing my ass off
But we made more money than we did doing MGB and coopers.
Half the problem was the crap so called mechanics, I had only one problem with my new TR7 it was trying to convince the service manager the oil dripping from the bottom of the bell housing was not from a camshaft cover gasket leak, need I say any more.
Spencer Branting
Rubbish mechanics!
As a Stag owner of eight years I wouldn't disagree with most of what you have covered, clearly well-researched from the plethora of material out there about the Triumph 'Snag'. And yet...it endures and in great numbers, with somewhere around 10,000 cars still around from the near 26,000 produced. Most with their original V8s too. That is right up there as a survival percentage, and testament to a couple of key factors. The Stag is a widely regarded as a beautiful and slightly unusual design. It is surprisingly practical too, comfortable with genuine 2+2 rear seating. It is well equipped, e.g. with power steering and electric windows. Its suspension is sophisticated, fully independent and using wishbones and trailing arms as still being used today. And THAT engine is actually very sweet and smooth, powerful enough, and reliable when properly put together and properly maintained. The bodies rust of course (early Mk 1s were better quality, another BL cost-cutting problem) but so do E-types and Astons - they all do from that era. You can still get a really good Stag for under £20k, making it a hard classic car package to beat in many ways. Just avoid the bad ones!
Thirty years ago an excited work colleague here in Ozz informed me that he had bought a "touring car". He took me out to the company car park and it was a V8 Stag. Beautiful looking thing but he was a bit puzzled when I asked him if he had bought a standby car along with the Stag. He had an old Datsun 1200 and I told him that was the car he would be driving most of the time (I was a mechanic decades ago). The Stag turned out to be a nightmare, everything failed...absolutely everything. It was an endless loop of breakdowns and repairs. The old Datsun outlived the Stag by a factor of many times to one.
I still say " There is nothing like the Japanese machine ". Trinidad & Tobago.
@@ramishrambarran3998 The Datsun 1200 was the first car I ever drove. A 12 engine. Surprisingly, 9:1 compression, but it ran just fine on regular leaded gasoline. The Hitachi carburetor had a very thoughtful feature: a glass window in the float bowl with a mark to show the correct float height. It was a pretty car, a little like a miniature Mustang. Owned a B-210 and an F 10, both with A14 engines, but neither was as attractive as the 1200.
@@jimeditorial Being under British rule until 1962, we came from a culture of English cars. The introduction of Japanese cars changed everything. They were reliable, and fast.
The Datsun 1200 could make 100mph, and also give 40mpg !!!
Trinidad & Tobago.
I worked at a Triumph Stag specialist for a number of years. many of the engine faults discussed in this video I have no experience of and appear to be little more than much of the same old misinformation about the engine recirculated. the key issues with the engine were: early simplex timing chain stretch cured with later duplex, big ends (not mains) wearing out prematurely due to partial oil starvation caused by a large casting nodule directly infront of the oil pump restricting flow (poor quality control), head gasket failure from poor build quality/incorrect assembly procedure/overheating from casting sand left inside partially blocking the radiator/thermostat or water hose failure/incorrect coolant bleeding procedure, lack of will to read or complete lack of use of the technical manual by those working on it. if a Stag engine is stripped, blue-printed, internally updated to its MK2 spec and built properly it should give many many miles of trouble free motoring.
"the worst engine ever made" in my view was the Essex V4. everything about it was cheap and nasty, they regularly stripped timing gears and literally shock themselves apart. I said 'was' because another Ford Essex engine may now have taken the trophy - the EcoBoost...
The 'Eco-Boom' and the PSA 'Pure-Crap' wet timing belts are at another level of stupidity and incompetence !
@@JamesSmith-tv3pz this wetbelt fashion seems to be causing everyone trouble. there are reverse engineering kits appearing to convert them to timing chains hopefully ending issues with otherwise quite well conceived engines (talking very generally here)
I worked in a Triumph dealership, Most weeks we had Stag in the workshop with the engine failed. Overall it was a beautiful car, but the engine was weak. Yes I thought the Rover V8 transformed them.
I loved replacing the timing chains on them when I worked for a Triumph dealership. They allowed 24 hours for the job and I could do them in 6. 18 hours bonus was wonderful.
Did you break the chain link and feed a new one through joined to the old one?
I was a Range Rover mechanic with Henlys. To get the gearbox out the workshop manual said to take out the front seats and remove the entire bolted in floor pan and take the box up through the cabin and out the door, 12 hour job. I worked out a way to get it out underneath, using some very long studs from the block to enable the box to be slide backwards. 4 hour job! As you say lovely bonus.
I used to make more bonus than wages, and if you went on holiday for say a week, they’d give you 1/52 of your bonus with your holiday pay. I was having a two week holiday, but when I got my pay packet there was no bonus in it, should have been 2/52 of the previous 12 months bonus. The wages girl was new so I explained how it should work, said no problem, you can give me it in my pay packet after I get back.
First pay packet I got after I got back was so thick I couldn’t get it in my overalls pocket. When I got home I opened it and found that the pay clerk hadn’t given me 2/52, but 52/52s, an absolute huge some of money! I didn’t say anything but put it all in the savings bank so when they realised the error and I had to pay it back, at least I’d have the interest. And they never did ask for it back, when I left a few years later I bought my self a Porsche 911
My dad restored a Stag in the 80s in Wisconsin. Sold it to a Minnesota couple in the early 90s. I loved that car. It sounded amazing, but I do remember it overheating a lot.
Interesting, and always well presented! Thank you!
It might have been extremely unreliable but when running properly it was a smooth and very agreeable engine. More importantly and probably because of its unique firing order, it is the best sounding engine ever. Bar none. Exquisite. I had a 77 for several years. Other than rust and a failed fuel pump it was very reliable. Never overheated.
Ahh yes. The best sound came from a mild steel, wide bore exhaust. Sadly they rusted too quickly, especially when the cars were run on classic insurance policies and never really warmed up. The replacement stainless steel exhaust was usually narrow bore and never sounded as good.
One was always hoping to find a long tunnel to drive the Stag through.
My favourite memory of my Stag was when I passed a load of Italian coach drivers having a smoke just outside Greenwich Park gates. They saw the car coming, so I booted it for a bit of V8 rumble just as I passed them, to some approving looks.
Having rebuilt many Stag engines, I found the best solution to the head studs was to coat them in copper grease. This prevented seizure of the studs and allowed the studs and head to move during expansion and contraction, increasing head gasket life.
Also st the time head gasket and oil technology isn't what it is today. We see many Cranks and shells that are smaller than the Stag, produce more HP, but do not fail.
If built today with modern materials they would be as reliable as most engines and there's no mistaking the sound of the Stag engine.
The article mentions special antifreeze needed. Just what additive package or brand name or magical ingredients was needed,do you know ?
@@paulmanson253 50-50 mix of water and ethylene glycol, in other words common, ordinary antifreeze. Trouble was, lots of people didn't see the need and used straight water.
@@ostrich67 Hmm. I recall that Prestone brand name coolant only has I think 2 ounces per gallon of additive package,and that most others have less. Once the mix goes even slightly acid,and contact with metals will do that,sacrificial zinc that is grounded,or complete flush and changeout is the only way to avoid a real mess. At least that was what I was taught.
Sometimes the stuff sold as water pump lubricant will have more additive package.
The problem is finding something for long term use in a car you wish to keep in really good condition.
Anyway,thanks for that.
@@paulmanson253 They had to be filled with Inhibiter Anti-Freeze to stop corrosion. This is now in all cars, but back in the 70's was special, compared to the ordinary Anti-Freeze back then.
You would put ordinary Anti-Freeze in this time of year and then the copper head gaskets especially, would start to fail Paul.
@@martin4787 Right. Got it.
It is a common misconception that the Triumph V8 was a based on a pair of I4 combined. It is more accurate to state that this engine was designed as a V8 using some elements of various earlier Triumph engines. The later I4 variants were closely related are based on the left half of the V8. Of the motors that are closely related, the Stag went into production before any of the I4 cars.
It is also noteworthy that the pre-production engines were much more reliable and many of the maladies of the Triumph V8 came down to late design changes to reduce cost and poor build quality. If the V8 had gone into production as originally designed it may well have been far better.
I think you will find that the i4 engine went into production BEFORE the Stag V8. It was made by Trimph for SAAB, introduced in 1968.
Looking at the Wiki page on the 99, I was surprised to read that SAAB made a few 99 cars with a Stag V8. That must have been a very front-heavy car, with some startling handling characteristics. They dropped the idea and adopted turbocharging instead.
A friend of mine bought a V12 Jaguar and would debate your conclusion that the Triumph was the worst.
Oof. The worst lol
A guy I watch called the Car Wizard worked on one.
Nice car, but complex engineering.
That's an example of a fundamentally good engine given the kiss of death by our friends at BL. Turns out, $5 in WA testing for the engine's support mechanisms (cooling, ignition, fuel, etc) does not in fact make for a very reliable engine, as your friend found out.
My buddy's dad had a v12 jag. for two years the v12 worked. We ended up yanking it out and dropping a 350 sbc with aluminum heads and carb in it lol. He got it just cause he liked the look of it. After we were done he liked the drivability of it lol
Alls well until you try and remove the head from a neglected engine - then you will enter the gates of hell! The head studs run through the water jackets in the heads - if coolant ratios/changes are not adhered too, they will corrode quickly making engine maintenance very difficult. Nice when running, but a complete bitch when broken & requiring repairs.
There was a tv programme a few years ago in which Robert Glenister, the actor and an engineer called Ant ***** purchased a car in poor condition refurbished it and then auctioned it, the profits going to charity. One such car was a Stag, knowing its reputation the engine was stripped down and examined by a thermodynamicist. All aspects were checked and found to be ok. When re- assembling the engine however they discovered it was possible to misalign the head gaskets and thus impede the cooling flow. After re-assembly and re-Installation the engine was put through a demanding heat test cycle and passed with flying colours the temp gauge not going above ‘Normal’.
@Bercilak de hautdesert Life on Mars; depicting a contemporary police officer who was teleported back to the NYPD seventies, where said 'future cop' knew certain events were slated to come down and via time traveling, which changed the direction of impending outcomes, with their probable repercussions
I stand corrected! I couldn’t remember clearly which brother it was.
What you described concerning the Stag head gasket design flaw, where a pair of dowels on each bank, would've eliminated said flaw.
Had to be more than misaligned head gaskets; the thing was a pig from the get go as were most british made cars.
Golly I love your documentaries. Just how straightforward they are, and how "documtaryish" your voice sounds.
Sounds gay
My dad drove us through France in 1978 at 120mph all the way. It overheated and local mechanics did not know how to deal with it as it was so modern.I got sorted in the end and we went to a lovely little hotel. :)
I can't imagine any inability of French mechanics to deal with something because it was too modern.
I bought a 27 year old Stag in 1998, the service history showed the engine had blown up early in its life but at 84,000 miles the original engine was still in place. I used the Stag as my only car for the next two years, covering 42,000 miles without any problems and only normal engine maintenance. At the beginning I did replace the noisy rear differential, upgraded the rubber body mounting bushes with nylon, and changed the tyres from 175 to 195. The only time it failed on a journey was when the top radiator hose split, the roadside assistance mechanic fitted a new one and I went on my way. I sold it in the end due to signs of rust in the lower bodywork .
I then bought a 'facelift' model XJS 5.3l V12 - now there was a money pit.... again it was my daily car and lots of fun though it was serviced every 9,000 miles and if the bill was under £1,000 I felt I had got lucky. I replaced that one with a later model 6.0l V12. Both lovely cars to drive but massively more problematic for maintenance than the Stag ever was.
The real irony is there's very little difference between a Mk 2 2000/2500 and a stag from the A pillar forward, they could've easily fitted the 2.5 PI engine used in the TR6 and 2.5/2500PI saloon or the Rover V8. I've seen owners of both Stags and Mk 2 2000/2500s here in Australia fit either the Rover 3.5 or the 4.4 from the Aussie P76 in them with few issues (except for the weak Triumph IRS differential that is lol).
ALL the original B-O-P alloy DETROIT V-8...
Don't forget THAT fact...
You Limeys!
Did quite well as block for Brabham Repco F-1 1966 - 1967.
Bruce's very first Mk.I
And in MANY MGB's here...
Big Healey's
And other Brits cars
at least one AC Ace....
Even in the back seat of our CORVAIRS!
Perfect!
American hot rodding!
Hill, Gurney, Ginther, Miles, Shelby, Gregory
Riverside USRRC
Lotus & Cooper V-8s
Ignore THAT you blighters!
J.C.
@@375GTB Aren't most American cars made in mexico.
@@turbinegraphics16
No, the other half are made in Canada.
Richard Good makes a kit to install bulletproof Nissan short-nose R200's into TR's and Stags.
@@turbinegraphics16 aren’t most European made in China ?
I worked for an engine reconditioning/engineering workshop in the 1970's, and saw all the Stags terrible foibles at first hand. Sadly a beautiful car with a faulty heart.
I drove the absolutely last TR8 to come off the line. It was one of the funnest cars I've ever driven.
Had my Stag since 2008 with its original V8. Why do we keep Stag bashing in 2021?
Good question! For such an unreliable car, there still seem to be a lot of them around. I see more Stags than any other Triumph on the road these days. Several completed the Round Britain Reliability Run (2000 miles in 48 hours) last weekend.
@@StupStups they are retro fitted with Rover V8 chum.
@@bertiewooster3326 Don't need to be. Nothing wrong with the engine that a caring rebuild won't sort out
@@psk5746 Maybe today but when new they were bloody awful really awful unreliable etc.
@@bertiewooster3326 Thanks to workers that did not give a toss. Such a shame
You have to admit after you fix its problems, it’s a good looking car & has one of the best sounds when it pulls away from you .
Is that after you’ve sold it ?
@@paulthomson2375 ooooo, that hurt , it did sound nice so did the tr6 .
The Triumph V8 was truly awful. Italian V12s are pretty bad. But the worst of all time was the German V2.
V2? The rocket?
they were fast tho
@@kamrankhan-lj1ng Could be. I could have said "V1", it would be difficult to make an engine with that configuration!
@@Keckegenkai They certainly were quick, about 3,300mph. That's almost as fast as an SSC Tuatara, probably...
@@johnstedman4075 the pulse jet engines of the V1 were cheap to produce which wasthe whole thinkinng of that weapon. Later Spitfires with the 130+ octane fuel of the americans could keep up with that bomb.
Christ man, that styling isn't even in the same league as Aston's or Jaguars.
You are comparing basically a budget sports car maker to luxury car brands. Yes the styling is not the same lol
@@Xiones11 good design hardly costs any more than bad. You could get an art student to sketch you something looking cook and them you go about building it as near as you can.
James Dean died in 1955. The rollover crash standards weren’t proposed for more than a decade after that, as part of a Ralph Nader-led consumer protections movement.
Also, the Stag needed the T-bar roof arrangement primarily due to its body structure’s lack of torsional stiffness.
As a Yank, that error caught my ear. I've just started watching a few of his videos which I've really liked, but now I'm wondering if he's playing a little fast and loose with info that's more opinion than fact. Though it is very odd that this thread consists even of former technicians that disagree on whether this engine was good or bad.
I owned a stag for 16 years and had very few problems with the engine. It‘s not true that it had little torque. I find that it was a very good compromise between torque and the ability of high-revving. In my opinion, the problems could be solved easily if there would have been the will and the time to do it.
Uh......NO Not by a long shot. The 2.3 Chevrolet Vega engine was unquestionably the worst engine ever built with conventional iron piston rings running on UNSLEEVED aluminum bores supposedly "hardened" with sodium hydroxide, also known as lye or Easy-Off oven cleaner
One was fortunate if it wasnt dead at 35,000 miles.
The aluminum bores were in a block made of 17% silica. The bores were etched to expose the silica which made a very hard wear surface. Many of them lasted over 100,000 miles if they were not overheated. The same type of aluminum block was later used by Porsche and Mercedes.
Another problem was valve guide wear which led to oil burning. The ignition was connected to the oil light so that if you ran out of oil the engine stopped before the engine was damaged. If the owner neglected to check the oil the engine could stop unexpectedly, but all you needed to do was add a quart of oil and it would start up again. Some cars were junked by owners who did not know this.
The Vega was not the most reliable car but never as bad as a Triumph.
@@mrdanforth3744
Isn't it funny nowadays how coated aluminum bores are the latest "high tech" but when Chevy did it back then people called it junk?
The fact is they were actually ahead of their time doing it but people being the way they are didn't take care of the engine's properly and then wanted to blame their problems on the manufacturer.
From years of being a mechanic I can tell you countless cases of me pulling a dipstick or draining coal black burnt smelling oil out of an engine and telling the owner that they need to change their oil more often and every single time I'd hear "I change my oil regularly".
I told one guy whose engine I was rebuilding "Yea right, that's like being a smoker and telling a doctor who's looking at an X-ray of your chest that you're not a smoker".
Living in denial doesn't change things.
@Alfred Wedmore
And I still stand by what I said, most of the issues happened because of how people are when it comes to taking care of their cars, including owning my own motorcycle shop I've been working on them for over 30 years now and the part you don't get is that people take much better care of their motorcycle's than they do their cars, especially car owners that don't own motorcycle's, they're really bad when it comes to maintaining their vehicles.
@Alfred Wedmore
Well indeed that's true, but once again comparing motorcycle's to cars is an apples to oranges comparison simply because ON AVERAGE motorcycle's have a tendency to be much better cared for than cars, all the way down to not being used year round in areas that have all 4 seasons, once again ON AVERAGE.
@@mrdanforth3744Sleevless aluminum engines are garbage, no matter who makes it.
You know, I've been watching your content for a long time, but I'm still not subscribed to you, and I think it's time to change that.
Your content is always so informative and good. You should seriously consider a book, or a bigger platform. More people ought to be learning what you're teaching.
Thanks for all your hard work, and glad to finally join the club.
Glad to be sub number 67,100-something.
Have a nice day!
I had a Stag with an electric engine can and upgraded radiator in the late 90's - early 200's, drove it as my everyday car for 5 years. I found it as reliable as the SAAB I had at the same time! A sweet car to drive, and going through tunnels in it listening to the twin-exhausts was great!
I think that you're being very unfair to the wonderful Stag. Back in the early 1970s I owned two from New and regularly drove them from the UK to the Mediterranean covering many thousands of miles. They were wonderful fast comfortable tourers, I never had any overheating problems whatsoever. My only criticism was the rather small boot. The hardtop was wonderful converting a continental summer tourer into a warm saloon for the English winter.
How is Listing FACTS and Telling the Truth Unfair !
@@SpacedOdyssey Because all of this information is from cars that had been neglected for a long time and not the facts when they were new. As I said before I had no problems whatsoever with either of mine, both bought new and I drove about 200,000 miles in them including driving many miles around the Mediterranean in the the heat of southern Europe without experiencing any overheating. They were lovely cars.
@@tonycamplin8607 I concur with you. MOST of the "facts" in the vid just are NOT true. The cars failed because of poor manufacture/assembly/dealers skimping on maintenance. NOT because of design.
The reason for the T-bar roof was body flexibility. Taken from the 1995 book Triumph 2000 and 2.5PI by Graham Robson, which has a chapter on the Stag:
"Then there was the scuttle shake problem. Even with stiffened floors and sills, early cars were by no means rigid enough. Still unsolved when Spen King took over from Harry Webster in 1968, it was eventually cured by a John Lloyd brainwave.
Spen King: It wasn't just the noise, it was real movement. If you watched a piece of dirt on the screen when you hit a bump you could see the movement. It wasn't nice. John put in the connection between the roll over bar and the screen to make it a T-bar. I didn't think it would work, but it worked like a miracle. I don't think that had ever been done before."
Same as the Porsche T-Top.
This legend of US Regulations forcing everyone in to only build T-tops or cars with roll bars is a myth.
Carmakers like to say that as well, Porsche boldly states that it was their Intention to introduce safty and obey to US regulations.... wich is a lie.
Much more closer to the fact is, that Unibodies in the late 60ties and 70 just were not build to be with out their roof.
I've seen two Stags here in America. The first was when I was a teenager and saw one pull into a space next to me; it was blue and had its engine swapped for the Rover V8 (from a wrecked TR8, ironically). The second was a few years ago, a yellow example with a Japanese V6 I can't remember. They were stunning cars.
The worst engine ever made was the Ford V4, used in the Zephyr 4, Corsair, and Transit. But it made a brilliant boat anchor.
Haha, yes I remember those. Absolutely dreadful engines.
enjoyed seeing a yellow one roll on by our dealer lot today in London Ontario Canada. Gave me a start and made my day
The Triumph Stag was a beautiful car but one of the most unreliable, probably just second to the Lada.
It is a shame that BL didn't fit the straight six Triumph engine or the V8 Rover engine, perhaps the choice of both.
I bought a Lada for 25 dollars. In the day it was exactly what a case of beer cost. I drove it for 4 years. The Lada was a great car. In Canada the problem was all our cars used 10W30 and of course we used that in the Lada as well. It used 20W50. Putting the wrong oil in made the oil seep past the rings and get into the fuel causing smoking and the wrong conclusion that the engine was blown.
The one I bought did exactly this. It needed a new engine according to the seller. I was just getting it for parts. I changed the oil and filter and drove it for 4 years. It still worked fine when it went to the wrecker. There really wasn't anything wrong with it. I wish I had never gotten rid of it. Best heater ever!
As a Canadian I ought to know!
Nussings wrong viz Lada. Is tuf cookie. Jyu wanting holiday in Gulag, capitalist?
@@peterrhodes5663 no offence, comrade.
A neighbour bought a very low mileage Lada from the Russian trade representative about 1987. It was cheap, he thought he was getting a bargain but it seems the representative was glad to dispose of his lemon, at my friend's expense.
I can only assume build quality was inconsistent, some good, some not so good.
@@thomasburke2683 I bet he ran it with 10W30 instead of 20W50. Make no mistake, they were cheap, and old technology. They still had carbs when everyone else had adopted electronic fuel injection to replace mechanical fuel injection. They were 3 generations behind what was being made everywhere else. They also needed regular maintenance when every other car had sealed for life components.
Crude, rough, cramped. But, reliable and easy to fix. And I can't say enough about the blowtorch of a heater it had.
@@kellybreen5526
was tempted by Lada Nivas in BC in 1990s...
Worked at main dealer in UK in 1970's have rebuilt few Stag's ,the overheating problem could easy be resolved though but many that we sold had no engine problems . I liked the Stag a well sorted one with Triumph V8 is really nice car to drive many of the rover conversions spoilt the car unless you could get front suspension well sorted . We were told the export cars apparently had larger radiator and didn't suffer overheating . One engine I rebuilt had 8 dragged pistons we later found out old lady owner used choke knob to hang her bag on , obviously she had to pull it out to do that LOL . Other thing was when we did head gaskets under warranty all we got paid for was gaskets / labour no heat skim ! they then seeped coolant on head bolts then no chance of unscrewing studs to get head off
Not a Rover but my old long gone dad used to work in a MG repair shop back in the 60s and i remember how he sometimes looked tired when getting home and said, another sad customer today when some of MG,s engines shared the oil with the gearbox and when dirt from that gearbox found its way to the engine it usually was ... BAD. 🤔 He also used to test repaired Jaguar E types and i who was a little punk back then was in heaven when traveling in one of those and remember him sometimes saying, back to the garage again when this one doesnt work as it should. That was another time with another quality. Thats for sure.
Your timeline has some errors. Triumph did not choose to build their own V8 because the the Rover V8 wasn't available. They chose to create a family of modular engines that included the slant 4 and there were even plans for a slant 6 and V12. They did this before Rover even had the rights to the Buick V8, so Rover has nothing to do with it. The choice to go to 3 litres from 2.5 was due to the smaller capacity engines low torque, not as you say that the 3l engines awful torque due to being oversquare. The waterways in the engine are not compromised by the cylinder bores but rather poor quality control and poor maintenance once in use. The water pump is often a point of critique, however when compared to the Triumph straight six, it is at the same height of both engine and radiator. Look closely and you will find the pump is below the radiator fill point, not above as so many claim. The choice for the pump location is due to SAAB who had first exclusive rights to the slant 4 - in their cars the engine is mounted in reverse which meant the was little to no room for accessories to be mounted between the 'front' of the engine and the firewall. Due to the modular character the V8 got the same setup. The long chain is moot as BMW and MB both fit/have fitted simplex chains to their engines for life. Solution in the Stag is to use BMW or MB IWIS chains and not the inferior product Triumph and later BL specified. In fact, this is where the bean counters had their way - something that Chief engineer Harry Webster would not have allowed had he still been at Triumph. The Stag V8 was not really a bad design, but it didn't give much room for abuse - which it got plenty of through bad QC, low quality parts and bad maintenance. In the same line - a Ferrari engine given the same treatment will go bang just as quickly.
Hmm, a Ferrari motor (long block) rarely goes bang. It’s the accompanying accessories that can leave a Ferrari or any old car left sitting. Ferrari, also is very comprehensive and specific about maintenance, which is not for the faint of heart or disinterested.
You're not kidding about the tight space between the accessories and firewall on the SAAB installation! I changed the alternator on mine last month and there's not enough room to pull out the alternator pivot bolt, you have to unbolt the whole alt mount off of the engine block.
What amazes me is that more dont do the concentric rods that the nsu prinz 4l had, two rods to turn the cam from the crank, reliable, quiet, light, lower power loss
Wow, you make it sound like they broke down continuously. I owned three, a well used example that I inherited from my father and two more, one an almost new mk.2 with less than a 1000 miles on the clock. I had zero problems with any of them. They were smooth, fast and sounded fantastic. If I had any complaints they centred around the handling of the rear end and a tendency to rust, a not uncommon problem with cars at that time.
Did those engine's have carbs or mechanical fuel injection?
@@dukecraig2402 I dont think any production stags came with injection. It would be nice to put fuel injection on one just to see how much better it could be.
@@davehitchman5171
I thought that it looked like Stromburgs in the picture but somewhere throughout the comments here someone told someone else that they came with mechanical fuel injection, so I thought maybe it was a wrong picture for the subject or maybe just a first year thing.
Since they did use the Stromburgs then I'm forced to comment that they should have used SU's.
I always wanted to build something like a Chevy small block with four 2" SU's from off of E Type Jaguars and see how that'd run, I know from experience that an SU is my favorite carburetor to run on a Harley Davidson, they're fantastic on them and as far as I'm concerned should have been put on from the factory.
@@dukecraig2402 All my Stags had Strombergs and to the best of my knowledge they all did, unless someone changed them..
A friend of mine had one ,if it ever ran for two days straight it was a miracle .
The Worst Engine Ever Made? Undoubtably in period, it was an enormous problem and was a massive let down for Triumph. Now that we are 50 years on, we find that it's a new day for the Stags engine. These engines can be easily managed with modern coolants, modern mechanical components, and of course being attentive to oil changes. They are quite reliable, produce a lovely sound and bring the Stag experience full circle when traversing the countryside.
I've owned 2 Stags and 2 Daimler MKII with V8 engines. Both Stags, ironically, ran perfectly! However, both the Daimler engines overheated and required rebuilds. So in my personal experience, I don't consider the 2.5 Edward Turner V8 engines to be any good, especially as they revved slow and were very sluggish. Perhaps it performed better in the fibreglass Daimler Dart (being much lighter) But overall the best V8 of the bunch from that time period was the Rover V8 and that's what should have gone in the Stag.
I used to hear nothing about the Stag V8; I'm guessing the aftermarket 'reverse engineered' its V8 and, figured out ways to keep it running probably, and now here's the rest of the story.
To people commenting that the Rover V8 should have been used: Stag development started in 1964, 3 years prior to Triumph merging into Leyland, so using the Rover V8 wasn't an option. Car development wasn't so quick and agile as it is today, it took years to develop and once a solution has been chosen, it was very hard to deviate from that path (think of the Wankel engine that should have been in the AMC Pacer or the air-cooled flat-six which was originally thought to power the Citroën DS). After the merger Rover didn't want Triumph cars to be equipped with their V8 anyway (the Triumph 2000/2500 was already competing with the Rover P6) and that didn't change after the BL merger in 1968. But from an engineering point of view the engine's initial design wasn't that bad, BL's management decision not to let Spen King develop fuel injection on the originally planned 2.5 litre but instead opting for boring the engine out and using dual carburettors made it a lot worse and BL's cost cutting and terrible quality control did the rest.
I've just had a head gasket go for the first time on my Stag. Good Lord, it's only 48 years old, what a terrible engine. It will pull from 750 revs in top gear, howls up to 5,000 and is the best sounding engine on the planet. I love my Stag and its V8.
Such an astoundingly interesting video - I love all your content, but I'd appreciate even more in this sort of vein, really liked the deep dive into this specific engine.
This video is a great shame, very technically detailed but so wrong in important points. The first being that the water pump was above the top of the cooling system. It's nonsense the pump is 75mm (3") below the top of he radiator filler. The decision not to go ahead with fitting the Rover V8 engine was made on the simple basis that BL were not at all sure they could produce enough Rover V8 engines to service the expected demand for the Stag and Rover P6 production. His final point is well taken but the real proof of the pudding is the survival rate of the Stag, almost 25% of the total production are still on the road after approaching 50 years. I own a 73 car with approaching 300,000 miles on the clock with the original Triumph V8, gearbox, and overdrive which I think proves the car was not he disaster the commentator makes it out to be.
As a new vehicle produced by BL the car was an undoubted disaster. However it was a truly beautiful creation which has motivated many of its loving owners to put right what BL got so badly wrong mainly due to their horrible build quality. There was still so much right with this car its such a pity BL as usual managed to pluck abject failure from the jaws of what should have been a great success.
I must admit, I've always wanted a Stag as they're a gorgeous looking car. I watched this video and I've read many of the comments and I conclude that, if I can keep some of the most over developed Norton motorcycle engines running then I can live with a Stag engine once it's properly sorted. That purple colour they did some in was so lovely and of it's time.
@@PurityVendetta The color is 'Magenta'
The cost of increasing the manufacturing capacity for the Rover V8 would surely have been much less than proceeding to design and manufacture a completely new engine. I'd say that that little furphy was used as an excuse to let Triumph engineers have their way. That of course raises the question: why did the Triumph engineers need such expensive placating.
@@doubledee9675 You can believe what you want to believe, but the facts are that the TV8 was a done deal before Leyland/Triumph merged with BMC. As someone who has owned a Stag for 34 years and knows the history in detail I can tell you that the decision not to run with the Rover engine was taken because the BMC element of BL had serious worries about being able to produce enough RV8's to satisfy their needs and what thought to be a huge demand for the Stag if the car sold in the numbers that they were anticipating. They did in fact fit RV8's to some factory prototypes and they also fitted the TR6 injected 2.5l straight six but had to drop that because the injection could not meet US exhaust emission standards. So at the end of the day they stuck with the TV8 which as my experience with 287,000 miles on the same engine with one rebuild at 180,000 miles is not the bad engine this video makes it out to be.
Worst engine of all time? The GM U.S. Diesels of the 1970's... Ruined any possibility of Diesel cars in the U.S,
Only good thing with the diesel it was based on a olds gas v8 . So basically you got a super strong block to convert to gas for racing
@@davidm3302 They weren't that strong. The 20:1 compression ratio of the Diesel cracked the engine blocks. That happened with both the 350 V8 and 231 V6's. Between that and putting Chevy 350's in Oldsmobiles, as well as Pontiacs and Buicks soured a generation of buyers (Baby Boomers) on GM. A fatal blow for future sales...
@@johnpinckney4979 "Dieselised" versions of petrol (gasoline) engines work well in tractors where the RPM range is limited but in cars, which are required to use a higher RPM range, enormous loads are put on the engine blocks.
I know a Stag Specialist in Australia who will not touch anything but the original power unit and he says the only thing wrong with the Original Triumph Engine was the Diabolical Build Quality. David claims to have got 450,000 kms out of one of his own builds timing chains and jackshafts excepted
Why oh why was such a beautiful car ruined by British Leyland Build Quality?
are you referring to Dave Clarke automotive rydalmere? He services my stag as well. Hes brilliant!
one of the best sounding Brit GT engines ever made...a stunning 'organic' woofle :)
Well this is a perfect example of how one mistake basically turned into a chain of poor engineering.
This is a perfect example of poor management decisions and when the project is heading for a failure, blame the engineers for doing what they were told.
Didn't they also have a welded gearbox chassis mount. So the gearbox couldn't be removed from under the car, you had to take the whole engine gearbox out from the top?
Wasn't the engine a american designed Buick
@@peterraidal6659 No. that was the Rover V8 former Buick. That engine evolved so much under Rover that it was just like "Trigger's Broom". Fitted into the TR8.
Trigger's Broom is on UA-cam. All two minutes of it. Look it up if you want a laugh.
In defense of the OHC Triumph v8, when the carbs and distributor were working in unison, and the weather was dry, and the tank was full of Sunoco 260, the engine made great no-load rev sounds when the throttle was blipped. As a breath-taking bonus, it made marginally more power than the 2.5L Daimlier Dart v8.... Best Stag I've ever encountered was in the early 90s when i worked for a high-performance tuning shop in SE Virginia - an ugly-buff-colored 71. A quiet-mufflered sleeper of the highest order - it sported a 325 pound steel sleeved aluminum 377 inch TRACO Gem1 block with aluminum heads, flywheel and oil pan . With a close ratio 4 speed - and making not much more than 300hp, and 350 #ft, it pulled effortlessly to 7000 1st thru 3rd. With a 2800 pound kerb weight, it was a rocket ship compared to a 3200 pound iron block 70 Corvette. Owner was looking for an original engine for the Stag and had plans to build a vintage road race 63 Corvette using the TRACO.
I met one of the design engineers who worked on the the TR6/Stag /TR7 in the mid '70s when I was about to embark on my carrear in the motor Industry and he told me the Stags roll over bar was primarily for chassis bracing and the Roll over protection it offered was secondary.If the converted (roof cut off) Triumph 2000 unibody hadnt have been so bendy (poor torsional rigidity and scuttle shake on rough roads) it would never have had or needed the T shaped roll bar. As the American Export market was crucial to Triumph , Importer Kjel Qvale felt that a V8 engine was the way to go as Americans preferred them over the 6 which in that market was regarded as a lower end unit. It was also because he wanted a product that would be seen as a cheaper alternative to a Mercedes V8 350 SL Convertible. As in the home market , fuel economy was important due to high fuel prices in the UK , a small displacement V8 was deemed the way to go. Despite both being companies based in the Midlands Rover and Triumph had been competitors before the Leyland era (the Rover 2000 and Triumph 2000 went head to head) so there was an internal resistance at Triumph against using the Rover 3500 powerplant (and a resistance at Rover to supply Triumph and Jaguar with it ) so Triumph got Ricardo to design and engineer the engine (they outsourced as it was seen by management as the cheaper/faster alternative to designing it in house) The resulting unit had to be economic on fuel ,US emmisions compliant , light and pretty cheap to produce . The Stag unit had special assembly requirements (being all Aluminium and OHC) and the engine assembly line workers were used to assembling the more forgiving and simple Herald/Spitfire 4 and the 2000/2500 6 powerplants , as were dealership mechanics , Other mechanics who were used to working on Aluminium block and head OHC powerplants such as the Alfa Romeo and Coventry Climax FWA /Imp units and Jaguar V12's were OK with the Stag , but most lacked the patience needed for it (except some outfits like Brian Hart) In the USA the situation was worse, where owners relied on gas station pump jocjkeys to monitor coolant ratios. levels and oil levels and the engine was vunerable to problems caused by coolant leaks and incorrect anti freeze/water ratios(and ham fisted mechanics accustomed to simple iron block and head , ohv V8s) . On reflection I think Triumph tried to work a miracle with limited funds and knowledge of V8 engines and suffered for it (as did most customers) Was it one of the worst engines ever? Not really, a pretty valliant underdog effort IMO , its great to see some are still cherished and are in use by enthusiast owners .
About 20 years ago, on a 4th of July (perhaps a Sunday), I went to my local gas station late (in central NJ) in the afternoon to get my BBQ propane tank refilled. Had to wait for the attendant to fill it, as it was a holiday, they were short staffed. While standing there, a guy pulls in, in a red Stag convertible, with smoke pouring out of the left rear wheel well. He was on his way from CT to Maryland, and the wheel bearing had given up the ghost on the GS Parkway, it was totally cooked. Ever the optimist, the guy asks the gas attendant is there was anyone there who could fix it while he waited. There was no mechanic there on duty, the kid wasnt a mechanic and probably no parts store open with a compatible wheel bearing within a 100 miles. He seemed confused that there wasnt going to be any option to get his car fixed on the fly.
The Stag rear wheel bearings are the same hub as the 2000/2500 sedans. They used to be alright/never had any trouble. I used to carry a spare hub (old factory built = went forever) as a spare under the boot floor for cross Oz trips. Only needed it once, is a 20 minute change over.
But the kits they sell now; either the spacers are sus, or not set up properly. They use a collapsible spacer. Mine used to do a LOT of miles. After I went through 3 hubs that lasted between 3 and 7 thousand k's (professionally rebuilt); I did my own.
I don't use collapsible, I fit solid spacers I hand make/fit. I made 3 hubs up like that, two to put in and a spare. The two in the car lasted 15 years and over a hundred thousand k's, so never had to play with them again. They should do, the bearings are huge for the size/weight of the car.
But in even an ordinary live axle car - bearings are held on by a collar. Without a mechanic on duty with a shop; or to replace the whole axle (what many did); still not like "changing a wheel". :-)
@@KJs581 : I did a lot of miles in Triumph 2000's and 2.5 PI's... rear hubs were never a problem for me, but the splines on the half-shafts used to wear if you were not diligent with your maintenance. Once that happened, you had to live with CLONK, CLONK, every time you changed between drive and overrun. Still loved the cars tho'. :o)
@@PiefacePete46 Yeah, they do wear after a while. I have JUST fitted some Datsun 180B half shafts; it is a mod I have been meaning to get around to for a while. My cars never suffered from the "Triumph twitch" which everyone complains about, but I used to lube mine quite well, and they were ok, but they are splines and do wear.
The Nissan shafts have been sitting there for 20 years and one of those things I was going to "get to eventually". They are a "ball in groove" joint, and a bit smoother. The Triumph ones are ok; but the Nissan ones are just a 20 year later idea. They take some reaming of yokes and hand fitting (Nissan Uni's slightly wider/slightly bigger dia) that I eventually got around to.
But interesting to remember - Triumph had that independent rear end and those hubs in the sedans from 63 onwards. So independent rear end in a mainstream sedan in 63. Here, the locals (Holden/Falcon) didn't get independent rear ends until mid/late 90's - so 30 years later. AND - Ihave never seen a Triumph with angled rear wheels; wheras the Holdens here with IRS were known for rapid tyre wear due to rear wheel sag/camber.
@@PiefacePete46 Oh, and yes, you are right, the hubs never used to be a problem, but they are now. I don't know what they do, but.....
I had an old factory built one, 30 years old (in mid 90's) that had a whine, but was a "get me home" spare. Still got it.
Then I went through 3 or 4 "refurbished/rebuilt" ones and they failed within 3,000 to 7,000 kms.
I got "none of our other customers......." No, because other customers now have show cars that do 600 kms a year. But when these cars were new; only 5,000 kms from a hub? No, they drove the wheels off them as family cars (and my 30 year old hub still has correct clearance, so it IS possible).
The small bearing on the rear is the same as the large one on the front wheels - and that carries more weight/lasts ages. The other rear bearing is half as big AGAIN as that - so they are more than capable.
I assumed that either the collapsible spacers in the kits now are defective - OR - people setting them up don't set them correctly.
Either way, easier to just "make my own" hand made solid spacer - they last forever. They'll outlast me now.
I pulled one off the other day. Been on there for about 15 years and done between 60,000 to 100,000 kms. Spec is 2 to 5 thou. I set it at 2 - now it is almost 4 thou. My solid spacer idea works for me.
Ohhh yes, the Triumph V8 is a story indeed. Perhaps next you could talk about a similar flop from the other side of the pond, Cadillac's Northstar/Aurora V8.
I'll throw in the Vega engine.
BMW s85 v10
My dad was an engineer and he had a Stag in the late '70s. He had to rebuild the engine, and I remember him commenting on a lot of these issues.
I had one in 79 with a warped head. I whipped out the engine and replaced it with a Chevy 350 small block. I swapped out the back axle for a Jag XJ series. I had to cut too much of the bulk head and tunnel out to get the Chevy in which resulted in a catastrophic failure at 60mph. I was sat in one half of the car on the road and my wife was sat in the other half in a farmers field. If you believe that then you'll believe anything but I thought I'd just add to the ambiance of BS.
😸😸😸
It may not be the most reliable engine, but it’s got to be one of the best sounding engines on the road of all time. For that alone it’s worth persevering with!
No question, it is. Has to be up there in the Top One.
Even better than the Ford Mustang engine in my MG ZT V8 which sounds just great. Particularly the induction sound which when mixed with the exhaust, that combination of sound is music to my old ears when that V8 comes on song. Especially in long enclosed tunnels.
2:30 - The main reason why they didn't use the Rover V8 was because Rover couldn't build enough of them. It was already being used in the Range Rover, Rover P6 and Rover P5B. They lacked the capacity to build enough additional units for the Stags anticipated demand.
2:45 - This is a myth. The 4-cylinder which the Triumph Dolomite used was derived from the V8, not the other way around. The Triumph V8 was a clean sheet design and not just two 4-cyl engines welded together.
4:30 - This is nonsense, it's not a Toyota MR2, you can fill the coolant as you would with any other car
i.e on level ground. The problem with the water pump being too high means coolant loss will stop it from functioning properly, as of course the water level drops below the pump intake.
Everything else was pretty much spot-on though!
I put a chevy 4.3 V-six in mine, and it performed quite well. Still have most of the old boat anchor somewhere in my shop.
I used to work for a guy called Ray Rajan who was a production engineer at BMC/BL and his version of the Stag V8 story was that there was not enough manufacturing capacity (or available capital to increase capacity for the Stag) at Rovers engine plant, also there was management "in-fighting" from the various companies within BL where none of the brands wanted to lose their in house r & d or production departments (or management jobs) and finally it was assumed that the Rover engine would be to big and heavy for the Triumph underpinnings leading to poor handling/high wear, he also worked on the modular DX engine for issigonis's 9X project where the engine was based around a modular 250 cc cylinder platform (750 cc 3 cylinder going up to 1500 cc 6 cylinder) which had enough "freeboard" in the design to allow enlargement to 300 cc per cylinder and his group proposed they could make a 2.4 litre V8 that could have gone into the Stag but this was rejected by upper management.
Contacted Hart Racing cos like them I'd fitted a 4 barrel Holley.
Told them I'd got a Carburation flat spot problem..they replied.."yeah so have we"!!!!
Clickbait video title. The Stag had quality control problems, yes, but I've never heard any serious or well informed person claim that it had the 'worst engine ever made'. More powerful specific output than contemporary Rover V8. Much higher revving. More efficient than Rover engine and not prone to the Rover's catastrophic sludging up. Certainly a better sounding engine than the Rover. If properly assembled and working as intended there just is not a problem with these engines - in fact, on a subjective level, it's one of the NICEST engines ever made. The only bothersome aspect is the frequency that timing chains need replacement.
I guess you own the one stag that never broke down.
@@onedarkhorsee Don't own a Stag. Never have. Unlikely ever to own one. Have you considered getting some perspective into your comments? People who only talk in ridiculous extremes can look a bit silly.
I remember doing a few chains on these back in the 80's, it's basically a bicycle chain!
I think you have a few myths in that catalogue of problems. The engine can be fairly easily sorted out, watch this: ua-cam.com/video/rr0goqxs8hs/v-deo.html. It sounds great and can produce power enough for a Grand Tourer and The Stag was never intended to be a TR replacement sports car.
That of course raises the obvious question - why should the purchaser of a new car need to sort out the engine, even if that be "fairly easy"?
One of my restoration shop employees was nearly 80 when he retired and was a classically trained British coach builder. I always laughed when he called my '67 Corvette 427/435 coupe a "Yank tank" and one of the most succesful, prolific and easily accessible engines ever made, a "lump." Funny how he would rather drive my tank than his '70 TR6 with half a "lump."
The term lump is not derogatory, it is simply British English slang for an engine.
@@mescko Yeah. I know. It was tongue-in-cheek.
Worst engine ever made? Not even close. By a runaway, the 1971 Chevy Vega 4cylinder aluminum block with NO STEEL SLEEVES! GM really did that, and for some reason thought it would work. A 100% failure rate within 30,000 miles resulted in oil blowing past the piston rings, most never made it to 20k. Worst. Engine. Ever.
Maybe I'm on my own but from memory the early Vauxhall Astra and cavalier overhead cam engines always seemed troublesome too as blew head gaskets for a past time and knocked out camshafts but rarely hear about those??
I will testify to that.Had to replace a head gasket on a Carlton with little mileage and two camshaft and follower swaps on astras.The drillings through the camlobes blocked and ran the cam and follower bone dry.Resultant rattle started and the cam quickly ruined.They were however good engines and very easy to do said jobs on.
"Looks to match the crisp beauty of the Aston Martin?" Gee, I guess beauty really is in the eye of the beholder.
The basic Michelotti body is gorgeous. But when you add that square side window and T-bar over the top it turns into a go-cart.
@@hagerty1952 Personally I dont have an issue with the tbar, and overall the body looks very good even today.
I worked on Saab 99's from '78 to '84, so I had lots of experience with the Triumph engines. They were basically the right side of the Stag engine, 1709cc at first, 1854cc later. Half a Stag engine with ALL the the problems. The Ford Taunus V-4 was the total opposite, almost totally bullet proof. I had a '73 96 with that engine, loved it.
We tend to forget that the Saab version of the 1854cc engine was successfully engineered to run Bosch injection in the US, and that when Saab took the engine up to 1985cc they produced a superb unit that ran into the 2000s. Triumph/BL were just lazy and didn't put in the work. It's pathetic.
As a former mechanic I still have nightmares about the many burnt exhaust valves and blown head gaskets that I replaced
But that is your income, fixing broken cars!
The sound of the triumph v8 is so mellifluous, beautiful. Obviously a flawed engine but on aural pleasure alone it trounces the rover v8.
I had a listen and it sounds like two SAABs in stereo. Beautiful!
Yes, the Triumph V8 sounds good when it's running. But a bit of work on the valve timing and exhaust manifolding of the Rover/Buick unit produces a similar effect, and the engine runs for ever....
Some one: Triumph V8 is pretty bad
Cadillac Northstar: hold my beer
The Northstar is a bad engine, but most aluminum engines are, in my opinion, less than wonderful for a street driven car.
Cheap shot at a brilliant engine. Its bad reputation was gained because of 1998-2000 production that had a tendency to blow the head gasket when in overheating situations, however, this was due to the head bolts being too short and with a thread way too fine for an aluminum block. Had they used the LS1 head bolts from the start, as they did with post 2004.5 Northstars, we wouldn't have had this conversation.
@@fenrislegacy Bobby that's a bad design all the way around changing water pump on a Northstar and tell me it's better than an LS. No weight do anything all in Northstar tell me better than a ls. We can also discuss using steel bolts in aluminum block causing them to corrode. I can go on head gaskets are just the beginning. The worst part about the North Star is it never even had to exist General Motors already had the best American-made V8 in the world and they decided they didn't want to use it in their Cadillacs because they wanted to be fancy. The only engine I can think of it's worse than the North Star is possibly the 5-4 Triton. Possibly the Quad 4 but just the early ones. Go put some wrenches on these pieces of s*** then you can tell me how great they are
Sad but true. All of this video. I too had a Dolomite 1850 - only half the trouble of the Stag. That engine sounded so smooth - so unbothered. But sadly it self destructed itself then fought like hell to stop you fixing it, what with the offset seized head studs, wonky water pump and crap aluminium that tended to return to sand if it could. Loved that car. My wife loved driving it. It had to poke me in the eye time after time to turn me off it. But eventually, to my regret, I was happy to trade it in for a pittance. If only! Thankyou sir for this video. So many memories for so many people. I still secretly hanker after a stag but I know ...
I bought one - new - in 1973. It went through 7 (seven) cylinder heads in the first year.
The stag needed:-
Rover V8 3.5
Flared arches and wider wheels
LSD and IRS and best spec suspension.
Galvanised body.
Top grade quality control.
With these changes, it would have established BL as a world beater. - As it was, it established BL as the worst manufacturer in the Western world. I suspect Soviet cars were more reliable.
Ever since Jeremy Clarkson highlighted this in one of his documentaries I have wondered why Triumph didn't go for the Rover V8. As you explained here in Triumph's steadfastness, I guess it became a case of too many cooks spoiling the broth, especially with becoming part of BL.
I've read elsewhere that Rover didn't have capacity to make the number of V8 engines Triumph required, on top of their other commitments. Triumph were already tooled up for the engine castings and internals because they'd been making the slant-4-cylinder engines for Saab, and would continue making them for the Dolomites and TR7 later.
@StupStups. I’ve owned my Stag 22 years now and with regular servicing with an annual reverse flush of the cooling system and top up with good quality anti-freeze I’ve never had a problem.
A Stag loving acquaintance of mine went out with Spen Kings daughter and when he asked the self same question of him Spen confirmed that to increase the production volume of the Rover V8 to meet the predicted demand for the Stag would have required a significant investment (money which BL didn’t have), and it would have added yet another delay to the Stags launch which was already 2 years late.
Hindsight has 20/20 vision but consider this - if they had been fitted with the Rover V8 from day one sales demand would have outstripped supply and the price of them now would be far beyond what I could afford...
So, Triumph was making a hot V engine before anyone else. Thats amazing
No, not by a long way, plenty of hot V8's around well before Triumph had their one and only shot at it.
@@onecookieboy I meant a hot V as in an overheating engine because the water pump is dead. It was a joke 😐
@@newdefsys Oh, sorry. By the way, they often call the BMW turbo V8 (and others) a hot vee, because the turbochargers sit in the valley between the cylinder heads.
@@onecookieboy "Hot V" actually means exhaust into the vee (and intake on the outside, instead of the usual which is the other way around), regardless of the turbocharger location.
@@brianb-p6586 I can't think of a single V8 engine which isn't turbocharged and has the exhaust exiting into the V of the engine, correct me if I'm wrong, but BMW was the first to do that to reduce turbo lag.
I’ve owned 2 Stags and would say this is somewhat brutal but largely true, and likely to upset a few of the dedicated owners referred to! The piece talks about hasty development but the project was delivered late. Triumph’s previous V8 was pre-war, so with little in-house competence the job was outsourced to Ricardo I think, and the outcome a verdict on general UK engineering and company management at the time. Unsurprisingly many of the BL and ARG cars that followed were equally mismanaged and we know how that ended in 2005. Bolshie unionised workers have been blamed for the industry’s demise but the blame for Stag and the rest lies more with their leaders, in my view. I’ve also thought for many years that Stag damaged the company so badly in the previously profitable US market that it hastened BLs demise more than any other car! Discuss?
Fun fact: the 1.7/1.85-liter engine first installed in the Saab model 99 was actually one half (an inline four) of this engine! I owned one and yes it was miserable. Removing the head, with studs seized which was almost always the case, consisted of prying it up by whatever means possible (chisels, prybars) until enough clearance was available to fit a hacksaw in and cut the studs. This usually ruined the head, so when you replaced a head gasket, you also got to buy a new head.
That would happen to Ford V8s with optional aluminum heads too. We would loosen each nut about 1 turn and drain the cooling system, then start the engine and suddenly floor it. That would usually break it loose. If it didn't, though, then you had to break them off in pieces and get new heads.
I thought the Stag was a beautiful looking car but only worth owning when the Triumph engine had been replaced with the Rove 3.5l.
I did 110,000 miles in 7 years when I was young maintenance was the key,dont believe the bs .
I think that is the issue - if you got a good one then great but many people didn't & the fallout of having a bad one was pretty horrific.
@@SB-vb8ch Exactly. Quality is Consistency. While the good ones were great, there were also all of the rest.
I had a Tr7 and a Stag.The Stag engine problem, cooling channels too small in the head. Old antifreeze would rot the aluminium head and clog the channels .. Cooling probs.. Getting the head off the block could be a nightmare .. The Stag looks a million dollars and a modern version would work today.. Even with all the probs , I loved it ..
I still own and operate a 1973 Stag since 1975 (46 years, 180,000 km). I must say your report is 100% correct. I observed on my car all the issues you describe. The first engine died at 15,000 km (head warping poor coolant distribution in the motor) and was replaced with a 100% new one by Triumph. So cylinder warping, poor cooling (necessity to force coolant into the engine by pressing the large rubber cooling hose), oxydation of all the Head bolts, the undersized timing chain. I love this car but sadly, engine is not the only problem it has: rear axle, power steering. The car is beautiful but you better have a nice set of tow-truck business cards
I've had three Stags, two with the original engine and one with a Rover V8, I had more trouble with the Rover engine than either of the other two, I never had an overheating problem with the original engines or reliability issues apart from normal wear and tear.
One of the problems with the Rover engine is it is 100 lbs lighter than the Stag engine so the front of the car sat higher and because there was less weight over the front wheels it would lock up under braking in the wet and yet my insurance company insisted I uprate the brakes because the engine was "more powerful" .