Triumph Spitfire Review

Overall Rating

Great looks, practical, fun to use. Overdrive a must.

Sluggish performance, terrible mechanical design and build quality, rust.

Lets face it, in 1971 you just could not be seen in a Triumph Spitfire. Absolutely not. They were regarded as slow, unsporting, poor-handling and badly built even by the standard of the time. Spitfires were for girls. A Midget was OK, the MGB all right if you were a farmer, the real 1275 Cooper "S" made a statement and Triumph's own TR5 was cool unless you'd actually tried owning one of the bloody things. Me, I was OK - I had an S3/SE Elan, so eat your heart out.

So how come if they were, and in reality remain, such an awful car, can they now get a recommendation, so much so that I, who would never have been seen dead in one at the time, actually *bought* one?

Because they're fun, practical to own and use, and very simple to fix. Forget the truly abysmal performance, the very limited road holding and the tacky build, for a summer day hood-down drive they're perfect. What else can you buy and run for the same money that has so much appeal?

The Spitfire is a sensible classic car buy. There are a lot of them around which means good club support and very, very good parts availability. Lets face it, you can still get the service parts at Halfords! Insurance with agreed values is cheap and early cars even get free road tax. You also get much more room both inside and in the boot than with a Midget. They really look the part, too, especially the face lift Mk4. In an "our Italians are better than your Italians" moment, Michellotti did a better job for Triumph than Farina ever did over at BMC.

If you want to run one for transport, seek out the factory hard top to replace the soft top for most of the British year. Not only is it actually waterproof, except around those frameless windows which never really sealed when new, but it cuts down noise, hugely improves visibility and even stiffens the car up, improving road holding.

Some words about maintenance, cos you're gonna need it!

They are very easy to fix, a fact you'll find out very soon after getting one. A common problem is the suspension trunnion bushes at both ends, an awful design that wears very quickly. The road holding of any Triumph with worn bushes reduces from mediocre to downright dangerous. Bushes are easy enough to replace until neglected, when the whole thing will seize solid and need sawing and drilling out, so look after them. Replace all the suspension rubbers and the rack bushes, too as they wear and mess up the steering geometry. There are several upgraded parts that can be used here, but be careful not to use too hard a bush or the solid alloy rack mounts on a road car if you want to keep any sort of ride comfort. Whilst under the car, you need to check driveshaft universals for wear and also front brake callipers, which tend to seize, and all of the handbrake linkage parts.

If you are going to drive the Spitfire in modern traffic, it needs some upgrades. Brakes: I think a servo is a must. With a couple of bits of piping and simple brackets, a period Girling or Lockheed servo can be mounted in front of the radiator and transforms the brakes. It's also worth replacing the brake discs as they are very cheap.

Engine: A mediocre unit even in the sixties that traces it's ancestry back to the standard eight, so don't expect too much. 1 SU carburettors, an SAH exhaust and electronic ignition will transform the car and actually give you some acceleration. Add a top oil feed to stop the whole thing grinding to a halt. The long-stroke 1500 has more torque than the 1300 in standard form but can be politely described as "not nice"

Gearboxes are fairly reliable, though the Triumph was one of the poorest designs of its time, compared to the "A" series and Ford's superb three-and single-rail offerings. Overdrive makes such a difference that I'd advise against buying a car without it. But be cautious here. Make sure that the overdrive hasn't been added later because the final drive ratios differed and if the differential hasn't been changed with the gearbox, you'll have a car that just won't pull OD 4th. The units themselves are very reliable and reluctance to engage is usually just dirty oil and filter.

Most cars now will have had the rear spring revisions that appeared on the Mk4 cars and so won't display the downright dangerous behaviour of early Mk1 and 2 cars. By modern, or even sixties, standards adhesion is low and you'll occasionally find that the rear slides on wet roundabouts but quick, accurate steering and the fact that you're really going very slowly makes it fairly safe and rather fun. If the rear has any tendency to tuck a wheel under, the bushes need replacing.

They rust, so if you're buying, this is the most important thing to look for. Ignore any mechanical problems, they are easy to fix, but rust is always lurking on a Spitfire and simple looking areas like sills are very difficult to repair properly. Check the floor, the boot floor, the base of the doors, all those raise seams and the wheel arch joins. Even the chassis does also eventually rust. Even when you own one, they need constant attention and really need to be garaged. The root of the problem is that, like most '60s cars, they were made using a large proportion of recycled scrap steel. There was ferrous oxide in the sheets when they went into the presses - these things were rusting before they were even built!

So is it a recommendation? For the most fun you can get for the money and sheer owner satisfaction, a definite yes, but do realise that you're buying a car that is far more compromised and needs much more attention than any modern second-hand hatch.