| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 31042 | 2003-03-10 04:14:00 | ot - car stuff... | tango (2697) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 127024 | 2003-03-10 04:14:00 | hey just wondering if anyone knows how heavy on gas is a triumph 2500? it has a 2.5L engine (obviously :P) theres one for sale for five hundred bucks and it's in realy good nick. anyone know? | tango (2697) | ||
| 127025 | 2003-03-10 04:47:00 | The 2500S could manage 20 MPG, but the 2500PI was not quite as fuel efficient. You don't mention which it is. In other words they guzzle it, but it would be the cost of maintenance that would be the real expense. The petrol would be cheap in comparison. |
godfather (25) | ||
| 127026 | 2003-03-10 05:09:00 | manual or auto? either way, fuel economy would suck (compared to jappa's today of course), also unless the engine has been recon'd and the carbs tuned correctly then fuel ecy would be pretty poor, about 20-25 mpg. however, if it is mint then go for it. lovely classic cars. be prepared to spend money also on - rear muffler (they rust through regularly), rear engine mount (break reguarly), engine main/crank bearings (they rattle if you dont change oil regularly) sam m |
sam m (517) | ||
| 127027 | 2003-03-10 06:45:00 | Fantastic cars . I had a 2000, which I am told was the same engine as in the Massey Ferguson tractor . Very, very reliable cars - but parts getting harder to source . But what the hell, they're a classic and more comfortable to drive and miles safer than your everyday common garden variety Japper . . . . . . Were originally sold as "The Poor Mans Jag" I would love another one if I could find one! |
Baldy (26) | ||
| 127028 | 2003-03-10 06:58:00 | haha yeah i'd love to have it, but paying for gas would be hard (i'm only 16 :P) Baldy, why do you say more comfortable and safer? |
tango (2697) | ||
| 127029 | 2003-03-10 07:22:00 | > Baldy, why do you say more comfortable and safer? The car seats are like armchairs, has independant suspension all round (i think) and if you were unlucky enough to have a prang, you will do very little damage to the Triumph compared to the average Toyota/Nissan. They are built STRONG! Almost armour plated LOL |
Baldy (26) | ||
| 127030 | 2003-03-10 09:03:00 | sweet, i might try find a smaller one now :D you know if they came in anything smaller than 2L? |
tango (2697) | ||
| 127031 | 2003-03-10 09:13:00 | oh and are they rear wheel drive? | tango (2697) | ||
| 127032 | 2003-03-10 10:32:00 | The thing about the Triumph 2500 is that it is a twin carb...a real b***h to tune...so take it to a mechanic first to see if its tuned right...if it is...sweet!...if its not then you might have to spend a bit of $$ to get it right. | promethius (1998) | ||
| 127033 | 2003-03-10 20:35:00 | But the 2500PI is fuel injected. Very early mechanical fuel injection. Not as economical as the dual carb. Same advice stands. Its NOT the cost of petrol, you can only afford an early british car (and enjoy as a "classic") if you have a lot of spare money. If its the petrol cost that is worrying you, then I suggest buy a "disposable" jap import. |
godfather (25) | ||
| 1 2 | |||||