GT6 £14,000 !

[Edin Dundee]

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/131536667948? ... EBIDX%3AIT

[Jon Tilson]

Is it a good thing? Or is it just more money than sense.

There is no way a GT6 justifies that value on automotive merit. Yes it looks ok but they drive agriculturally and are
probably sub MGB in enjoyment.

I'd rather have 2 sprints for the same money. That money should also get you a far better (as a car) decent TR6, a factory TR8 or a super stag.

Jonners

[cliftyhanger]

If it an excellent example it is probably the right sort of price. These are increasing in value quite rapidly, and about time. Considering their rarity and the experience they bring, they are worth a good few bob more than a spitfire. They cost the same as TR's when they were new (maybe why they never sold in big numbers) but a WAY better sportscar than an MGB. I have owned GT6's and driven MGB's a fair bit. The six is just a fantastic engine, far superior to the 1800 b series.

I think a Stag is a very different animal, never a sportscar, more of a wafty GT (or a convertible 2000!) but stags are good value at the moment. Not sure Dolomites (except sprints) will see the values that will compare.

[Carledo]

probably sub MGB in enjoyment.

Jonners

Have you EVER driven a GT6? I lived with my home built GT6 convertible for a number of years. It was my daily driver and trackday toy in 1 glorious package. it took me touring in Europe and took my kids to school. At the time I owned it, my gaffers son had a factory MGB GTV8, my GT6 could and did frequently wipe the floor with the B, even when we swapped cars! Less fun than an MGB???? PAH!!!!

And now who's talking down values?

Steve

[Jon Tilson]

So you home built a car with an open top and claim it is in some way representative?
Have you ever driven a real one?

An MGB GT isn't as quick as a GT6 in a straight line but there really isn't much of an argument when it comes to
a drive on a country B road. The B will never leave you in a position where you wonder if you are going off from terminal
understeer or flip you backwards into a hedge. The B is a much more comfy place to sit too, with proper seats and some room.
Even though its a gutless plodder with pretty awful ride quality I think it gets my vote over a GT6.

A BGT v8 is detuned to only about 135 hp as std and a GT6 is 110 so your competitor must have been below par.

Anyway this is about the 14k price....

Well done the seller but as a buyer I can think of many better ways to loose that sort of money.

Jonners

[matienzo]

Jonners, The "home built" GT6 convertible would be a spitfire body on a GT6 chassis and running gear (there are other permutations). The running gear is typically all Triumph and as such the characteristics to the Spit/GT6 remain. I've driven both the GT6 and the Spitfire countless miles. Both are most enjoyable to drive without any hint of throwing you of the public road or wandering about. Its like anything - a subjective opinion and also dependant on the condition and the setup of the car.

As for the £14k. Price is market driven not based on "automotive merit". There are plenty of GT6s out there that are less money and in great condition but despite that this car got top dollar. There will be a very good reason for that. That car appears to have a nice history package and is close to the last built before the untimely end of the GT6. Good for the seller and I'm sure the buyer will be very pleased.

[cliftyhanger]

I suspect the GT6's that Jon has driven have been badly maintained, or else MK1 and he didn't grasp the handling foibles.
Yes, they do understeer a tad, but still a true sportscar as opposed to a cambridge coupe! After all, that sportscar feel is what the money is usually about.

Nothing really wrong with MGB's. In fact as a car they are fine, I would have one as an everyday hack, but they I would have no enthusiasm of one. In fact, in many ways they drive like a Dolomite/toledo, but not as good in teh bends (would be my current thinking, though the MGB's I drove were not mine so I drove with due respect)

[Jon Tilson]

I've owned a Spitfire 1500 for about 35 years so when it comes to heraldry I do actually know my onions.

The problem with all the six cylinder engined variants is they are ALL too nose heavy. Combine this with an
iffy rear suspension design of which the rotoflex Vitesse mk2 and GT6 mk2 and early 3 are the best and you
dont have a recipe for optimum handling.

You dont buy a Spit for its ride quality... You buy it cos its cheap as chips
to buy and maintain and a doddle to work on. That hasnt changed in the 35 years I've loved mine. Its also completley unpretentious, which I really like. As is in fact the MGB and GT too...
That being said the mk4 swing spring and longer shaft combo makes for a decent handler if a bit lacking in rear
grip, which is where the GT6 is no better. So poor rear end grip and a nose heavy balance do not make for a
confident drive in poor conditions.

The MGB has a much more natural weight balance and a properly located back axle. It tells no lies and doesnt
ask many questions either. It doesnt have the power to...

Now an MGC is entirely a different thing and is if anything worse at being a GT6 than a GT6...too nose heavy.

Dolomites are a generation later. The coil spring and reasonable rear axle location is probably only bettered by a Fiat Mirafiori or Opel Manta among rear drivers of its generation as a ride handling compromise.

It really all comes down to weight balance. As Scotty says ye cannae change the laws of physics. It could have a lot to do with why the TR7/8 is actually the best drive of the lot...which few people will ever admit in public. If the TR7 has a fault, its a bit too wide for its length to be as good as it could be.

Jonners

[bodgerben]

stuff...

Yeah, yeah, yeah. But that GT6 does look nice

As for 14k's worth, to someone, definitely.

I looked to see when I was taken around the track in a nicely sorted MK1 (I think??) this little beasty :



She would rev well past 7k with ease and was an absolute hoot. I have no idea what the owner had done, apart from lots. But she was running SU's and produced the most lovely sound over 6k. I'd love to own a properly sorted one

[Carledo]

Mine was built around a 69 GT6 MkII chassis and mechanicals with a 1500 Spit tub bolted on the back, ie the best way! the only mods were stiffer front springs and Spax shox all round, the rear spring was (deliberately) the very tired original GT6 one. It ran on 5.5j Steelies with 185/60 Yoko A008s and was almost impossible to lose on a dry road, mainly because I put a LOT of effort into getting everything square and all the geometry perfect. But I did no more than anyone SHOULD do when doing a rebuild of this magnitude. I've driven GT6s that scared the living daylights out of me at a fraction of the cornering speeds mine was capable of, its all in the setup! There are so many possible adjustments on a GT6 that its easy to get it wrong and I guess this is a contributing factor to Jonners' dislike.
I'll put some pix up when my scanners fixed.

Steve

PS, that's a MkII GT6 in your pic, Ben! Jonners will probably tell us these don't count cos they have the rotoflex suspension and handle beautifully, even on the limit. With a little fettling, the initial understeer Gt6s were built with is eminently fixable.

[bodgerben]

Thanks Steve, I couldn't be arsed to look if the MK1 or MK2 had the front bumper low or high.

That red one handled lovely, but by the lord harry did the 2 litre engine rev, I'd heard that they could be made to spin freely like a small bearing 1300, but wow, and the noise.

The 14k one would be a great start to make a fun car

[Carledo]

MkII Identifiers are high bumpers, louvres in wings, chrome vent on c pillar larger painted numberplate lamp........ and lots of mechanical differences!
A lot of GT6 afficionados prefer the 2.5 lump but I think it ruins the car, the 2 litre motor is much more free revving!
Here's a thought, the SD1s 2.3 and 2.6 SOHC straight six is reputedly based on the Triumph block how about a triple webered one in a GT6?

Steve

[cliftyhanger]

The very early 2L engines (possibly before GT6, not sure) had the small bearing crank IIRC, and are a brilliant revvy engine.
A good friend had a newish 1600 Vitesse, reckoned you could go right through the red section with no worries, so the 2L version would be similar. Nice.

Agreed about the setup on these cars, my spit has Rotoflex (and 150+bhp) and drove like a pig teh first time it went out (to the MoT station). However, a couple of hours with some string, 1m lengths of steel, a couple of bricks and a spirit level, and it handles brilliantly. Far too many people play with the suspension then don'y bother with camber, rear toe let alone caster angles. Plus I have had a go at reducing bump steer. I may revisit that at some point, not yet perfect (but way better than at first)

[Jon Tilson]

Sounds like you guys GT6 experiences have been better than mine...

I do like the sound of the 6 pot through the triumphtune twin exhaust too...

But I rest my case on the basis that Triumph would never submit a late mk3 GT6 for road test...

I wonder why.

Just because a few of us late life owners can make a silk purse it doesnt alter the basic premise.

There will always be people with more money than good sense and I hope I find one when it eventually comes
time to part with any of mine...

Fun debate....too few of them of late.

Jonners

[Carledo]

One thing I did learn from experience of setting up several rotoflex cars:- You can have the wheelbase correct - or you can have the rear tracking correct - but not both!
If you ever need to do this, ignore the factory wheelbase figure and concentrate on getting the wheelbase identical on each side (steering must be absolutely dead ahead) with the rear toe out at 1/8" Since altering the toe affects the wheelbase and vice versa it's frustratingly awkward to get right but ultimately very rewarding!

Steve

PS, I can change a rotoflex coupling in 1 hour without removing the wheel, (assuming steel wheels) anyone think they can do better?