Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Car Chat => Topic started by: Field Marshal Dr. Opti on 03 June 2022, 14:39:53
-
https://youtu.be/7Woz270D1HE (https://youtu.be/7Woz270D1HE)
Always did like the Triumph 2.5 PI. :y
How far things have moved on. :y
-
Surely 'Frank Cannon' yank tanks had cruise control and air bags prior to 1971.... :o :o :o
....and fuel injection was around long before that. 2.5 Petrol Injection gives the game away. 8)
-
I'd want electric windows in my £55,000 car! ::)
-
Jensen beat it to ABS ..... :y
-
Wasn't the Carlton (Omega A) the first to have ABS as standard on all models/trim levels IIRC
-
Jensen beat it to ABS ..... :y
Yes...Jensen FF of 1966. Crude by the standard of today but it has to start somewhere.
-
Wasn't the Carlton (Omega A) the first to have ABS as standard on all models/trim levels IIRC
I believe it was the S Class Merc of 1978. Some 12 years after a car that was made by men in brown coats with pens in their top pocket, from West Bromwich. :)
-
All mk3 Carltons built in Russelhiem
-
Wasn't the Carlton (Omega A) the first to have ABS as standard on all models/trim levels IIRC
I believe it was the S Class Merc of 1978. Some 12 years after a car that was made by men in brown coats with pens in their top pocket, from West Bromwich. :)
Surely it was the Scorpio Granada, and the S Class was the 1st to have ABS as an option ..... everything on a Merc is an option.
-
Jensen beat it to ABS ..... :y
Yes...Jensen FF of 1966. Crude by the standard of today but it has to start somewhere.
Maxaret.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxaret
also an option on Escorts/Orion & early Sierras but not widely taken up
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Scorpio
The most notable advance was the fitment of anti-lock braking system, the first time this feature had been made standard across the whole range on a mass-produced car.[2]
-
I'd want electric windows in my £55,000 car! ::)
Apparently that £55,000 from 1971 is worth £716,217.49 today, so I'd definitely feel ripped off having to wind the window up and down with a handle! :D
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Scorpio
The most notable advance was the fitment of anti-lock braking system, the first time this feature had been made standard across the whole range on a mass-produced car.[2]
It may have been an option in 1978 but Merc drivers are wealthy so would have ticked the option box. :)
The Scorpio is too ugly for it's own good. 8)
-
.....
... but Merc drivers are wealthy so would have ticked the option box. :)
...
not all Merc drivers ::)
-
.....
... but Merc drivers are wealthy so would have ticked the option box. :)
...
not all Merc drivers ::)
I do apologise.
I refer to Merc owners from Bury only. 8)
-
.....
... but Merc drivers are wealthy so would have ticked the option box. :)
...
not all Merc drivers ::)
I do apologise.
I refer to Merc owners from Bury only. 8)
;D ;D
-
James Burke didn't predict...
Satnav
Traction control/ESP
Digital Instruments.
.......and for Tigger "Electric windows" 8)
-
James Burke didn't predict...
Satnav
Traction control/ESP
Digital Instruments.
.......and for Tigger "Electric windows" 8)
Leccy windows were reserved for the proper posh cars of the day .... Jags, Daimlers etc ;)
-
James Burke didn't predict...
Satnav
Traction control/ESP
Digital Instruments.
.......and for Tigger "Electric windows" 8)
Leccy windows were reserved for the proper posh cars of the day .... Jags, Daimlers etc ;)
Well that Triumph 2500 cost over £700,000 in todays money so that's proper posh! :P ;D
-
James Burke didn't predict...
Satnav
Traction control/ESP
Digital Instruments.
.......and for Tigger "Electric windows" 8)
Leccy windows were reserved for the proper posh cars of the day .... Jags, Daimlers etc ;)
Yes.....although usually an option even on posh motors like the original Jaguar XJ12 from 1972.
-
James Burke didn't predict...
Satnav
Traction control/ESP
Digital Instruments.
.......and for Tigger "Electric windows" 8)
Leccy windows were reserved for the proper posh cars of the day .... Jags, Daimlers etc ;)
Well that Triumph 2500 cost over £700,000 in todays money so that's proper posh! :P ;D
In a different life I owned a Triumph 2500S. Twin SU crabs rather than fuel injection but Stag wheels as standard. :y
-
I had a 2.5 Pi automatic and boy that would make my Evo look economical on fuel😂😂😂
-
I had a 2.5 Pi automatic and boy that would make my Evo look economical on fuel😂😂😂
My 2500S managed about 13 MPG around town and 20 on a long run despite overdrive top being nice and relaxed.
I think the main jets and needles were so worn it just slurped the petrol. :-X
-
I had a 2.5 Pi automatic and boy that would make my Evo look economical on fuel😂😂😂
My 2500S managed about 13 MPG around town and 20 on a long run despite overdrive top being nice and relaxed.
I think the main jets and needles were so worn it just slurped the petrol. :-X
That must have been before the 1973 oil crisis M'lud? :D
-
I still own a 2500S and a Mk2 2.5 PI, which I've owned for nearly 25 years. Both low mileage, and original. Worlds apart in performance though. With the PI, being mechanical fuel injection, the engine settings have to be kept in perfect tune, the metering unit operating perfectly, the throttles butterflies perfectly balanced, but it is extremely powerful when in perfect tune, and returns good mpg - around 25 to 30 on a run, marginally better than the 2500S on carbs. The enjoyable response from heavy use of the throttle however reduces this figure down to around 18. But let the fuel pressure drop, incorrect vacuum, combined with overheating of the fuel pump due to low fuel levels (the fuel cools the pump with hot excess fuel returned to the tank), which then doesn't cool the pump sufficiently, consumption increases to horrendous figures,
and the pump always dies at the most inopportune moment. The fuel level has to kept at least half full to ensure there is sufficient cold fuel to cool the pump. But what a great classic to drive!
The 2500S has twin HS6 SUs, with nowhere near the performance, but very simple to maintain and keep running smoothly. The problem with these late models was the steel used in their construction was imported and of poor quality which has resulted in the majority corroding away in front of their owners eyes. The S is now one of the sought after models, along with the PI, which now exist in low numbers as they were unnecessarily scrapped or sold on early due to poor running issues and the lack of understanding of the PI system. Even Triumph dealers struggled with it.
I've driven a good number of classic cars, but none give as much pleasure as this range of Triumphs!
-
I still own a 2500S and a Mk2 2.5 PI, which I've owned for nearly 25 years. Both low mileage, and original. Worlds apart in performance though. With the PI, being mechanical fuel injection, the engine settings have to be kept in perfect tune, the metering unit operating perfectly, the throttles butterflies perfectly balanced, but it is extremely powerful when in perfect tune, and returns good mpg - around 25 to 30 on a run, marginally better than the 2500S on carbs. The enjoyable response from heavy use of the throttle however reduces this figure down to around 18. But let the fuel pressure drop, incorrect vacuum, combined with overheating of the fuel pump due to low fuel levels (the fuel cools the pump with hot excess fuel returned to the tank), which then doesn't cool the pump sufficiently, consumption increases to horrendous figures,
and the pump always dies at the most inopportune moment. The fuel level has to kept at least half full to ensure there is sufficient cold fuel to cool the pump. But what a great classic to drive!
The 2500S has twin HS6 SUs, with nowhere near the performance, but very simple to maintain and keep running smoothly. The problem with these late models was the steel used in their construction was imported and of poor quality which has resulted in the majority corroding away in front of their owners eyes. The S is now one of the sought after models, along with the PI, which now exist in low numbers as they were unnecessarily scrapped or sold on early due to poor running issues and the lack of understanding of the PI system. Even Triumph dealers struggled with it.
I've driven a good number of classic cars, but none give as much pleasure as this range of Triumphs!
My car was 1976 on a 'P' plate and was severely rusted through after 5 years or so. By the time I got my paws on her she was held together by spit and string.
Lovely elegant car though. :y
-
I had a 2.5 Pi automatic and boy that would make my Evo look economical on fuel😂😂😂
My 2500S managed about 13 MPG around town and 20 on a long run despite overdrive top being nice and relaxed.
I think the main jets and needles were so worn it just slurped the petrol. :-X
That must have been before the 1973 oil crisis M'lud? :D
15 years before I was born so couldn't possibly comment. ::)
-
I still own a 2500S and a Mk2 2.5 PI, which I've owned for nearly 25 years. Both low mileage, and original. Worlds apart in performance though. With the PI, being mechanical fuel injection, the engine settings have to be kept in perfect tune, the metering unit operating perfectly, the throttles butterflies perfectly balanced, but it is extremely powerful when in perfect tune, and returns good mpg - around 25 to 30 on a run, marginally better than the 2500S on carbs. The enjoyable response from heavy use of the throttle however reduces this figure down to around 18. But let the fuel pressure drop, incorrect vacuum, combined with overheating of the fuel pump due to low fuel levels (the fuel cools the pump with hot excess fuel returned to the tank), which then doesn't cool the pump sufficiently, consumption increases to horrendous figures,
and the pump always dies at the most inopportune moment. The fuel level has to kept at least half full to ensure there is sufficient cold fuel to cool the pump. But what a great classic to drive!
The 2500S has twin HS6 SUs, with nowhere near the performance, but very simple to maintain and keep running smoothly. The problem with these late models was the steel used in their construction was imported and of poor quality which has resulted in the majority corroding away in front of their owners eyes. The S is now one of the sought after models, along with the PI, which now exist in low numbers as they were unnecessarily scrapped or sold on early due to poor running issues and the lack of understanding of the PI system. Even Triumph dealers struggled with it.
I've driven a good number of classic cars, but none give as much pleasure as this range of Triumphs!
Yes mine went well but was more than likely grossly out of tune.
My mate down the road has just had a dual bored lay, six speed gearbox delivered for his TR6 with multiple overdrive options, over two grand apparently 🥵 it’s lovely and a little trip up the road on it really takes me back :y I have also owned two triumph 2000 a mk1 and a mk2 my brother still has a 2000mk2 on the road.
-
Had one for a while. LOved it ,hated it!! Recammed it but 3 bearing crank meant i darent rev it!!
Half shafts were splinned but no matter how the were lubed thy would still lock up under load on a bend and then release so you were a yard away from line :-*
-
Had one for a while. LOved it ,hated it!! Recammed it but 3 bearing crank meant i darent rev it!!
Half shafts were splinned but no matter how the were lubed thy would still lock up under load on a bend and then release so you were a yard away from line :-*
The 2500 Triumph straight six was an ancient long stroke lump that didn't like to rev much. Mine was pretty breathless above 4500 RPM.
Probably designed in the fifties. Plenty of low speed torque though. :y
-
Had one for a while. LOved it ,hated it!! Recammed it but 3 bearing crank meant i darent rev it!!
Half shafts were splinned but no matter how the were lubed thy would still lock up under load on a bend and then release so you were a yard away from line :-*
The 2500 Triumph straight six was an ancient long stroke lump that didn't like to rev much. Mine was pretty breathless above 4500 RPM.
Probably designed in the fifties. Plenty of low speed torque though. :y
The needles fitted to the HS6 SU's had a lot to do with the 'breathlessness' at higher revs. BL were jumping on the bandwagon of emmission awareness at this time. The standard BDB needles delivered quite a weak mixture at the upper end, but a change of needles to BPZ or BDM needles enriches the fuel delivery at higher revs, keeping the same idling and low rev mixture, whilst not particularly adversely affecting fuel consumption. It has increased the driving experience, with a noticeable difference in pulling power at higher revs.