I hoped you might complete the set and you didn't disappoint. Rose tinted specs on maybe but the cars back then had character and didn't all have the same "face" like nowadays, on small, medium and large versions of the marque.
You can argue that older cars were not as economical or aerodynamic but they certainly had something, & I don't mean rust!
Anyway, another great thread
Totally agree Steve those older cars did have more of a distinctive look to them and had a lot more individual charm/character to them.
I saw a current Volkswagen Tiguan and BMW X5 the other day and I know they're totally different cars but from a distance and too the naked eye they look pretty much the same and there's loads of others which just seem to copy each other in the terms of looks and what they offer these days which is why you don't get too attached or excited about them as you would if say a mk2 Escort appeared.
I quite like that Avenger in Regan that'd be a rarity now... same it became a coke can in '86.
I'm surprised that the Stag didn't last longer as even then the were a bit collectable and kept their value. I restored one in the late 80s for someone and they spent quite a bit on it at the time because it was worth the investment.
Original 3.0L engine or 3.5L V8 conversion?
It was the original 3 litre Three litre as far as I remember. We have one come in at work regularly and that still runs the original triumph 3 life too. I think they were troublesome because they were basically two 1500s glued together. Always suffer head gasket and over heating problems.
Another interesting thread and I agree totally about cars. Ones from the 60s and 70s had individuality, character and style, even cheap and basic saloons. What's more, they were easy to maintain and repair, shame about rust though. Modern ones, and to me, that means mid 80s onwards, are bland and boring and I have no interest in them at all.