The Tri­umph v Rover de­bate heats up and our Fuzz talks to you about home eco­nom­ics.

Classic Car Weekly (UK) - - News -

With ref­er­ence to John Neumuller’s re­sponse to the ob­ser­va­tions (not crit­i­cisms) re­gard­ing Rover P6Bs and re­li­a­bil­ity while in use by the po­lice ( Your Let­ters, 3 Fe­bru­ary), as an avid reader of CCW, one of the things I no­tice with some reg­u­lar­ity, is for peo­ple to mis­take their en­thu­si­asm and pref­er­ence for a par­tic­u­lar make or model for be­ing an ex­pert on the down­falls of that mar­que’s ri­val/com­peti­tor.

With re­gards to the po­lice P6Bs, there were sev­eral is­sues that re­quired ad­dress­ing. One in par­tic­u­lar was the fit­ting of an oil pump in the man­ual gear­box, be­cause it was found when the po­lice en­gaged re­verse and drove at speed, it left the front bear­ings dry, and dam­aged what was al­ready an ‘on the limit of abil­ity’ gear­box. One or two cool­ing is­sues were sorted via the po­lice’s on­go­ing de­vel­op­ment work. Se­cond, this busi­ness of the Tri­umph six-cylin­der thrust bear­ing prob­lem did ex­ist, but nowhere to the ex­tent pub ex­perts would have you be­lieve.

It’s prob­a­bly the sweet­est-revving pushrod six I’ve come across. Then of course, there are its many long-dis­tance ral­ly­ing achieve­ments. I am for­tu­nate in hav­ing owned both mar­ques, and I hold both in very high re­gard. More im­por­tantly, I was work­ing on th­ese cars when they were new.

I there­fore con­cur with the ex-cop­per’s orig­i­nal view, and think that in gen­eral, as a high-speed pur­suit ve­hi­cle, the Tri­umph was in­deed su­pe­rior. It wasn’t for noth­ing that it be­came thought of as the de­fault choice for a sports sa­loon. Rob Squire, West Sus­sex

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from UK

© PressReader. All rights reserved.