Welcome to the DMR Site for British Car Information.
|
|
Austin-Healey 3000 - MK 1 or MK 11?
| Hi everyone, I have the chance to purchase either a early 3000 or a MK 11 tri-carb. Both cars are in similar condition. I would appreciate any comments on either car from owners. The Austin Healey club of the USA advises to avoid the tri-carb due to the difficulty in keeping the carbs in tune and its heavier fuel consumption. Any thoughts on the matter? Thanks. Neil P. |
| N.T. Peniston |
| Hi Neil; I have had a MkII BT7 tricarb since 1984 and it is the second one I have owned. Until two years ago when I took it off the road [that is another story], I averaged roughly 4,000 miles per year and never had any trouble connected with the three carbs. With my first tricarb in 1966 I learned a very valuable lesson; if it is not broken and I don't know what I am doing, don't play. In other words, I have not fiddled with the tri-carbs. In all the years I have owned my current car, I have had the carbs tuned twice by professionals. My only task has been to keep the dash pots filled with the proper oil. I have not considered the fuel consumption to have been a problem. Between 1984 and 2004 [21 years] I averaged 22.1 miles / Cdn gallon. In terms of km/litre, that works out to 7.8 km/litre. My 2001 Honda Civic in 231,000 km has averaged 15.0 km/litre. Heavy user? Depends on your expectations and comparisons. I realize this note is over a month after your original posting but if you have not done the deal yet, do give the MkII Tricarb serious consideration. --Scott Morris [Simcoe, Ontario] jstmorris@yahoo.com PS: I also have an early MkI BN7 awaiting a ground-up restoration. |
| J. Scott Morris |
| Tri Carb is a rare and desirable car. It's the one I would choose if I were looking again. Mark. |
| Mark Boldry |
This thread was discussed between 05/02/2006 and 16/09/2006
Austin-Healey 3000 index
This thread is from the archives. Join this live forum now