The Triumph Stag

The Triumph Stag was not conceived out of a process of careful market research. It was not built to fill a gap left by an outgoing model, although some may argue that (on paper at least) it was suitable as a replacement for the Austin Healey 3000.

Italian stylist, Giovanni Michelotti, had worked with the Standard–Triumph Motor Company since the late 1950’s and from the time he provided the design for the Triumph Herald, launched in 1959.

Leyland Motor Corporation Take Over

In 1962, Standard–Triumph became the property of Leyland Motor Corporation as part of an industrial take over and Standard–Triumph thereafter became known as Triumph. Despite this, and as Michaelotti was considered an important part of the Triumph family, he remained in place as the company’s chief stylist.

Other cars to emerge as a result of his extraordinary talent were the Triumph TR4 and the Triumph Spitfire, this one being the small sports car launched in competition against the Austin–Healey Sprite. Another car that Giovanni Michelotti was responsible for was the Triumph 2000 saloon, and later the estate version.

Michaelotti asks for a Favour

In 1964, Michaelotti needed a vehicle to use as a platform on which to base a project he was about to work upon. He was going to exhibit at the Turin motor show where he wanted to make a good impression.

He asked the Engineering Director at Triumph, Harry Webster, for a surplus works vehicle to use. As Webster and Michelotti where on good terms, a Mk1 Triumph 2000 saloon, which at the time was being used by the Triumph motor sport division, was earmarked for the job.

Webster insisted in exchange, if the car that emerged from the project was to his liking, Triumph were to get first refusal to build it. In June that same year, having finished its duties at the 1964 Le Mans 24–hour endurance race, where it has been supporting the works Spitfires, the Triumph 2000 saloon, registration number 6105 KV, was driven to Michelotti’s workshop in Turin.

From Saloon Car to Grand Tourer

When Harry Webster visited Michelotti, part–way through the development of the show car, he saw the drive train and suspension of the saloon had been retained, as well as the floor pan, albeit this was a little shorter than before.

Instead of a four–door saloon car body, the project car he was looking at was a four–seater, two–door convertible. This was a large grand tourer and Harry Webster was very impressed, deciding there and then he wanted the design for Triumph.

In the middle of 1966, the Michaelotti’s show car was delivered to the Triumph factory at Canley for evaluation and never did appear on the stand at the Turin Motor show. Webster, through his infectious enthusiasm for the car, managed to convince executives at Triumph it had the potential to be a huge success. He saw it as the model that would launch Triumph into the Grand Touring car market, thus opening big opportunities for sales to the United States.

The Triumph Stag had Looks, but Further Development was Needed

The development from show exhibit to production road car caused many headaches. At first there was the problem of the lack in rigidity within the monocoque body shell, and this was despite the use of double skinned body panels.

The issue was solved by the introduction of a rollover bar bracing both B–pillars together at their top, and another brace from its centre to the centre top of the windscreen surround. Not only did this solve the issue of stiffening the body, but it gave the car its distinctive T–top appearance, which became so identifiable with the model.

Webster wanted the car to be produced with a new Standard–Triumph engine, also under development at that time. This was a fuel injected 2.5–litre V8 unit, but work was still in the very early stages and it was nowhere near ready to be used in a production car. The V8 engine was also intended for other Triumph models of the future.

The Beginning of the British Leyland Years

Whilst all this was going on, and in April 1968, Triumph became part of an amalgamation between Leyland Motor Corporation and British Motor Holdings (BMH). The new company was to be called British Leyland Motor Corporation (BLMC) and brought together Austin, Morris, MG, Rover, Land Rover, Jaguar, as well as the badges of Daimler, Wolesley, Riley, and of course, Triumph.

The internal corporate changes that followed saw Webster’s talents being directed away from Triumph projects to the Austin and Morris division. Reluctantly, he had no further involvement with the car.

Triumph Stag Project Now Overseen by Charles ‘Spen’ King

In 1968, the reigns of the Triumph Stag programme were taken up by Charles King, or Spen as he was better known. Spen came from the Rover division of British Leyland and was the brains behind the design of the original Range Rover from Land Rover, released in 1970. He designed too the 16–valve cylinder head for the Triumph Dolomite Sprint, a new innovation at the time, a car that paved the way for a generation of 16V–badged hot hatches

The development of the Triumph V8 engine had moved forward with the enlargement in cubic capacity from 2.5–litres to 3–litres, and with the fuel injection system being discarded in favour of a more reliable carburettor arrangement.

British Leyland internal relationships were not good. Following the upheavals associated with the coming together of so many car plants and management teams, in–house squabbling at BLMC and development problems meant the first pre–production Triumph Stag was not finished until the Autumn of 1969.

The Triumph Stag is Officially Launched

In June1970, a year later than planned, the Triumph Stag was finally released to the public. The model name of Stag had followed this car right from the point when Triumph has agreed to build it, to public launch. This was unusual as traditionally cars were given code names to identify the project and a public name only being announced at the point of launch.

The Triumph Stag offered a mixture of features. It had a 3–litre V8 engine, true 2+2 seating, electrically operated windows, that distinctive T–shaped roll bar, reclining seats, detachable hard top incorporating a heated rear window, the option of automatic transmission (or 4–speed manual with overdrive) and air conditioning. It was also well appointed and with the wood veneer dash panel that had become a feature of Triumph products.

The engine produced 145bhp and would propel the car from 0–60mph in 9.3–seconds, and to a top speed of 116mph (manual gearbox). This was a luxury Grand Tourer intended to appeal to the more upper class motorist. Its sleek styling and choreographed publicity campaign offered promises of excitement and an overall different motoring experience. Certainly, there was nothing else like it being offered on the European market.

All that Glitters is not Gold

Despite all the glitz and glamour surrounding its launch, the promise of sweet success quickly turned sour for the Triumph Stag. It wasn’t long before realisation came there were serious issues with the car concerning poor reliability and shoddy build quality. Indeed, whilst production only lasted for 7–years in total, with 25,877 units built, it took only 3–years and 2,871 cars before United States importers announced they didn’t want any more.

Triumph directors had believed the Stag would be a worthy competitor to the likes of Mercedes, but were fooled by their own delusion. Whilst this was a car that promised to become a great ambassador for the Triumph arm of British Leyland, it actually became a symbol of all that was wrong with the car giant.

Flawed Engine Manufacture

The design of the 3–litre V8 engine was basically that of two 1500cc 4–cyclinder Triumph Dolomite engines formed together in a 90–degree V configuration, and with aluminium cylinder heads.

The Triumph Stag V8 engine became well known for overheating, caused by water pump failure, ill–fitting and poorly sized cylinder head gaskets, rough castings, and in some cases, left over waste material from manufacture being present in the water galleries.

Aluminium cylinder heads would warp, timing chains, which were too long, would stretch and fail, causing costly engine damage, and there was even a tendency for the engine to catch fire.

Why Wasn’t the Rover V8 Engine Used?

The presence of these design flaws is remarkable when considering how long it took Triumph to design and develop the car. What does defy rational understanding is the fact that Triumph theoretically had immediate access to the Buick designed Rover V8 engine, as fitted to the large Rover saloons, as well as Land Rover’s.

The Rover V8 would have provided a well–tested and well–sorted power unit, but it seems that whilst the various car badges had come together under the British Leyland umbrella, there was little cooperation between them. Infighting and resentment ensured there would be little cross–badge sharing of parts and equipment.

One of the arguments put up as a defence to not use the Rover engine was that of the inability at the time for the company to produce them in sufficient numbers. In hindsight there were other options.

The Triumph Stag 3–litre V8 itself produced 145bhp, but when compared to the 150bhp six–cylinder engine, this being a 2.5–litre fuel injected unit as fitted to the Triumph TR5 and Triumph TR6, it does beg the question of what was the point of Triumph building its own V8? Triumph already had access to reliable engines it could have been used.

The Triumph Stag Mk2 is Launched

In 1973, the Mk2 was launched, and with it Triumph promised to have ironed out many of the faults that had become associated with the original car. Alas, this was not the case and the continuing issues with faults and reliability only sought to reinforce its already poor reputation.

Customer complaints of mechanical failure were as rife as ever, and what made it worse was that replacement parts often carried defects before they were even fitted.

Triumph Stag production ceased in 1977, but despite the appalling reputation it developed over the 7–year manufacturing span, it has since become quite a desirable classic car. Whilst British Leyland never seriously provided for the correction of the engine faults, third party industries have since produced and fitted many reliability enhancing modifications.

Larger radiators, hardened crank shafts that were more accurately machined, electronic ignition, superior quality coolant hoses and belts, as well as better developed coolant and lubrication fluids have all added up to actually make Triumph Stag ownership a more reliable experience.

Aftermarket Engine Conversions

Some Triumph Stags were subjected to aftermarket engine conversions to the Rover 3,500 V8, whilst others used the 3–litre Essex Ford V6, or even the Triumph six–cylinder engine, as fitted to the TR6⁄GT6⁄Vitesse⁄2000⁄2.5pi cars. Paradoxically, the converted cars actually now are not as valuable as those with the original equipment.

The Triumph Stag was almost a really great car and there is no doubt had British Leyland got it right, it could have become an icon of British car manufacture at its best. In fact, had it been built by another company, it might have stood more of a chance of achieving that intended status. Instead, the Triumph Stag symbolises the worst in British car manufacture of the 1970’s and British Leyland in particular.

You Are Here » Home » Classic Cars Section » Triumph Stag

This page was last updated
Thursday, 27-Jan-2011

The Triumph Stag – Classic Cars