Well it was a V8 wasn't it anyway...?

And the last I heard was there were rumours the tooling was still in the building it was made in- they switched off the lights, locked the door and walked away and its still there 30 years later. Someone else may be able to confirm that.

 

That's interesting because if Nanjing were to cure the cooling issue (Hart racing could help with that) then the Triumph V8 may be up to date enough to go into a new car with only a few mods. The engine itself is actually much more modern and uptodate than the Rover V8. Saab only stoped using the V4 version a few years ago.......

It was a foolish decision not to fix the Triumph V8. In fact most of the cooling issues were caused by a poor casting process at the time (according to the guy who designed it).

 

Saab used the straight 4 - based on the Dolomite engine.

Their much earlier V4 was Ford's and straight out of a Transit van.

 

Saab used the straight 4 - based on the Dolomite engine.

Their much earlier V4 was Ford's and straight out of a Transit van.

The dolomite engines was the Stag's but a cut down version. The Dolly engine came first though...

 

It was a foolish decision not to fix the Triumph V8. In fact most of the cooling issues were caused by a poor casting process at the time (according to the guy who designed it).

It was a foolish decision not to simply drop the Rover V8 in there in the first place, like so many people did after their Triumph V8 engines died.

 

Yeh, it was a V8, my mistake. It just seemed strange that it was just left and never entertained again in any way. What would have happened to all the old Triumph engine and body casting at the time of closure in the early 80's.

 

Lest we forget....

http://www.sniffpetrol.com/issue005.html

 

Yeh, it was a V8, my mistake. It just seemed strange that it was just left and never entertained again in any way. What would have happened to all the old Triumph engine and body casting at the time of closure in the early 80's.

If they had invested a little more time and money to cure the overheating problems then it would have been a superb engine. It was a lot smoother and more powerful than the Buick V8 and streets ahead of the Ford V6 that was also used as a replacement. You'll probabaly find that those Stags that still have the original Triumph V8 command better prices than those with the Buick or Ford lump.

 

The engine was only really dropped due to economies of scale. The Stag was the only vehicle out of the dozens that BL were producing at the time, and Triumph were not given money to rectify it, as the Rover arm of BL already had their V8 as a direct competitor. Triumph were already working on the TR7 & 8 during the Stag's lifetime, and the Rover V8 was already planned for use in the TR8. The slant 4 in the TR7 was going to be replaced by the 'O' series eventually too.

As has been said the Triumph V8 was lighter and higher revving than the Rover lump, but was not as torquey. Hart Racing developed an injection system for the Stag engine a few years back, and with todays closer engineering tolerances, it might have been worth resurrecting it, but as we know, the emissions goalposts always keep moving.

 

...the last I heard was there were rumours the tooling was still in the building it was made in- they switched off the lights, locked the door and walked away and its still there 30 years later.

I've walked past the building that the production line is supposedly in. There is certainly something in there but the windows have got thirty years of grime on them and you can't see what it is...

Unfortunately, you can't go into that building any more. It's falling apart with the roof caving in and the creaking noise from opening the door would probably be all that's needed to make the whole thing collapse.

I certainly didn't dare sneeze within fifty yards of the building...

 

Lest we forget....

http://www.sniffpetrol.com/issue005.html

Okay I know sniffpetrol is a bit of fun, but they have shown a lot of ignorance in that article. As a Stag owner and a member of the Triumph Stag Owners Club I have to remind them that the Stag is one of the few classics where vast numbers of the original cars have survived. The cooling issue was the only problem of any significance. Yes the way it was built was as bad as anything else BMC made but it is fundamentally a good car. Stags with Rover V8's are not considered good car (contary to what most people think). The Stag was not designed for such a heavy engine. As said earlier if BL had fixed the cooling issue than the Triumph V8 would have been a far superior engine to the Rover V8!

 

i've got an article about the stag v8 in practical classics..adn it seems by tidying up the casting it can be a lot better, and some owners had sand in their sump ( !!)

 

My Dad bought a Stag about 18months ago... it was bought as a runner but really needs restoring which will occur in due course. Ours is an original early mk1 and the engine has never overheated. Needed a new water pump which we knew about, and did when we go it, but other than that its been good as gold. Its been to the continent on driving holidays twice and never missed a beat!

As for torque its got plenty of that, its an auto and will insist on pulling away from a near standstill in third all the time. Perfect engine for the car imo.

 

Okay I know sniffpetrol is a bit of fun, but they have shown a lot of ignorance in that article.

One thing that they're absolutely right about is that the Stag is one of the best looking cars ever.

 

I totally disagree that the Triumph engine was really any good. Yes it's true that today, you can use modern day parts, and materials to adapt the engine into a reliable unit, but it was never right or sorted from the factory and it IMO never would have been, using the parts that were available to Triumph at the time. If you have this engine in your Stag, then with plenty of work on the cooling system, a decent modern electronic ignition system, and modern quality high grade cam chains, you can have an engine that runs fairly well, and is reliable. It still will never be a power house though, and it has little room for capacity expansion, unlike the Rover V8. The 3.5L Rover engine can be built to rev to 7000rpm and make 240-250bhp, and you can make a 4.6L engine produce about 300bhp. All of this with naturally aspirated tuning, the potential with forced induction is even better! The Triumph engine just cannot make anything like this kind of power, and has such a poor spares, and tuning parts supply industry in comparison.

I can't belive anyone could dissmiss a beautifully restored Stag, as not being any good, or worth any money, or even not being labelled a classic car, just because it has a better more reliable Rover engine fitted, after people had probably given up trying to make their Triumph engines work properly for more than a few months. Today you can make this engine reliable with modern snd superior components, but 25years ago, i doubt you could have built a long lasting and powerful Stag engine, with what was available then.

No, i have to say that if i had a beautiful restored Stag, id have no hesitation in fitting it with the engine it deserves, be it a nicely tuned Rover V8, or a Ford Cosworth YB, And id pay more for a Stag with either of these engines fitted, than i would if it had the original lump still fitted.

 

That's interesting because if Nanjing were to cure the cooling issue (Hart racing could help with that) then the Triumph V8 may be up to date enough to go into a new car with only a few mods. Saab only stoped using the V4 version a few years ago.......

Are you for real?

 

I've walked past the building that the production line is supposedly in. There is certainly something in there but the windows have got thirty years of grime on them and you can't see what it is...

Unfortunately, you can't go into that building any more. It's falling apart with the roof caving in and the creaking noise from opening the door would probably be all that's needed to make the whole thing collapse.

I certainly didn't dare sneeze within fifty yards of the building...

Where abouts was the Stag engine (and all of the other Triumph engines) built?

Was it not built at Canley?

 

Are you for real?

Well yes. MGR does not require that many V8 engines so designing and developing a new V8 would be a waste of time and money. Buying in the Ford V8 again is possible but that's not a very good engine really if were honest. I accept the Triumph V8 is old but if and it's a big if you could find a way through emmisions testing then it would be fine even by today's standards. I mean the Stag engine is still newer than the Buick/ Rover V8 and Land Rover only just stopped using that. The Triumph V8 does lack the potential capacity of the Rover V8 but it's a LOT more modern and lighter. So for a few cars it may be worth it....especially in the Chinese market.

Let's get one thing clear the cooling has been fixed by various people since the Stag engine came out. Fitting a kenlow fan and bigger core are simple improvements. Electronic ignition is not necessary but nice and fitting a larger oil filter is also good but not essential. For about 300 quid you can fix the cooling issue.

The Rover V8 is not liked by most stag owners because it screws up the Stags handeling in a big way, it's just too heavy and most people never sort the suspension out on the conversions. The Ford V6 is actually a better bet. Yes BMC should have used the Rover engine but with it's problems fixed the Triumph V8 is a better engine for cars which requirer a lighter engine....(e.g sportscars)

 

Its weird how BL would just let the building sit like that, with all the expensive tooling still in place. Sure, the engine wasn't great (at the time), but there was probably a third-world automaker somewhere that would have gladly taken the tooling off their hands. I heard somewhere that much of the SD1 line is still in a vacant building at Solihull? Doubt thats true though.

 

Interesting debate here about Stag V8 vs Rover/Buick V8.

Some are saying the Stag one was a better engine, but does anyone have any facts to back that up? I had always thought the Rover one was lightish (being alloy), but now it's being criticised for being too heavy in the Stag!

So, does anyone have some data for us? What did the two weigh? Power output? Torque? Capacity? Carbs or injection?

Comparisons would need to be from the same era to be meaingfull - the Rover one went through many incarnations so it would obviously be silly to compare a recent one to the Stag V8.

 

I heard somewhere that much of the SD1 line is still in a vacant building at Solihull? Doubt thats true though.

Surely the SD1 line went to India? It became a Standard!

 

The one thing I remember about my dad's Stag was that wonderful burble - you could tell it coming a mile off - very distinctive. More distinctive than any other V8 motor I have heard since.

Remember Chas and Di sitting in one on the way to board HMY Brittania on their honeymoon in Gib all those years ago.....?

 

As a Rover V8 nut I feel compelled to make corrections regarding the weight of the Rover V8. It is actually a very light and compact all alloy unit, significantly lighter then the cast iron blocked Triumph V8 and the all iron Ford V6 units, The reason why it screws up the Stags handling is because it was so much lighter that the spring rates and weight distribution was wrong. A Rover V8 is only slightly heavier than a four pot Ford Pinto.

Also the Rover is bullet proof and very easily tuned (as 320 reliable bhp from my TVR testifies). Despite overhead cams the Stag only wheezed out 145bhp with 170lbft compared to the 3.5 Rovers 160bhp, 210lbft as fitted to the P6 of the time.

Triumphs V8 was also blighted with a range of problems :
* Overly long single link chains with poor tensioning that only go about 25,000 miles between changes and result in expensive damage if they fail;
* Inadequately sized main bearings with short lives;
* Aluminum head warpage due to poor castings which restrict coolant flow, leading to overheating;
* Water pump failures relating to the drive gear shearing


So a flawed design, high weight and warping heads sealed its fate I'm afraid.

 

Just dug out dry weights for comparison :

Stag V8 is 446lb...
3.5 Rover V8 is 320 lb...
3.0 V6 Essex is 374 lb...
Pinto is 307 lb....

Source : http://www.mustangworks.com/articles/misc/EngineWeights.html

 

Surely the SD1 line went to India? It became a Standard!

And before that it was built for 5 years at Cowley. I'd bet the entire Solihull production line moved there in 1981.