tr7triumph.com

Often while working on my wedges I wonder why the designers made particular choices.

Today it was wondering why the front wiring loom for headlights was brought through 4 small holes into the engine bay for connection.

It seems more logical to make and break connections from the underside.

boogie pilgrim

My guess:
Connectors were open (not sure if that was the style then or it was done for cost reasons) and the engine bay is cleaner than the front or under of the car with all the road spray/debris so if the connectors had to be somewhere, the engine bay was best.

I had heard somewhere that they were connected outside the engine bay at first but were changed to connect in the engine bay due to problems with water ingression. supercass.

Correct, this is the early engine bay of a 1975 that I am having restored - just the one hole

Hi,

Knowing what car manufactures are like at a guess I would say -

Cost

Speed of manufacture

Oh did I mention cost !

Cheers John

Plus it is much more convenient to unplug the red connector before manually raising the failed lights from below,only joking.Steve..

For me it makes much more sense to pull a relay or fuse that powers the lift motors than faffing about with a plug, but perhaps that's a 90s experience talking rather than the mindset of the mid 70s.
---
I appreciate the effort that Maxwell has gone to in capturing stories of wedge owners.

I'd really appreciate buying a book that had first-hand accounts of the engineers that developed the wedge. I particularly liked the Car and Car Conversions "One over the eight" article from March 1981 that was recently posted on Facebook.

Surely the time is now to capture as many first hand accounts as possible - and yes, I'd buy in to this.

Been there, seen it, done it. Just haven't written it into a complete book although many of the interviews have been written up and published in Triumph World. Anyone interested in Triumph cars would be best advised to subscribe to this magazine because it's quite unbelievable that over 30 years after the last Triumph car we have an A4 glossy magazine on newsagent shelves. That won't go on forever so needs all the support we can give it.

There aren't many of the major players left who I can interview now but I still get one or two coming out of the woodwork. George Spence and Peter Wilson appeared on the latest release to tell the TR7 and TR8 story from their perspectives for example.

So it seems we ended up with this because there was no weather proof connector in the BL development effort that was considered cost beneficial.

Another question is why the Triumph and Rover engineers couldn't convince BL mgt to continue development of one of the IRS setups that each company had engineered?

A confirmation to some of the answers the wiring question that I heard many years ago from a neighbor who was a factory dealership technician. A Lucas rep was in town to visit the dealer and my friend MIke asked why the TR7 had so many electrical issues. He said the Lucas rep told him that Lucas bid the TR7 4 times, and each time BL came back with "do it for less". The final bid from Lucas was accepted when Lucas told BL that those were the cheapest components they would sell. The Lucas
rep said don't blame us!

JL

Hi,

Still the case even with the stuff I work on, a suppose to be prestige car, if they save one pound they will. Over the life time of a model that all adds up.

Cheers John

This is the end result of building a car to a price, not a standard.

But that is just typical 1970/80's automotive wiring, Stag76. Modern cars look more organized and professional now because they use space saving technology that wasn't available then. Even a fairly simple thing like thinwall cable makes a significant difference. supercass