Before MG launched its GT into the market, Triumph had cobbled up a hatchback based on the Spitfire. The new car was heavier than the Spitfire, and its inline four-cylinder labored under the extra weight. The project was shelved – until Triumph sleeved its Standard Vanguard inline six-cylinder into the GT6’s engine bay. Tinkering with internals and intake resulted in 95 hp, enough to make the GT6 feel like a real sports car. This example is for sale here on facebook Marketplace, at a price of $19,700. It’s got a few cosmetic warts, but the engine and four-speed overdrive manual have been rebuilt, and the entire suspension is new. Thanks to T.J. for the great tip!
Here’s that 1998 cc six-cylinder, dressed with a couple of Zenith-Stromberg carbs. A video embedded in the listing shows the engine snorting happily through twin exhausts. Overdrive on the four-speed is a plus. The GT6 managed zero to sixty in about 12 seconds, and a top speed of around 107 mph. Yes, it still has that swing-axle rear suspension, which was changed out for Roto-Flex in the Mk II, and then for swing-spring midway through Mk III production.
A GT6 interior can be impressive once spiffed up, with its generous selection of gauges and switches. The dash pad is cracked here, and the wood inset needs attention. There’s no photo of the seats, so I’m going to assume new upholstery would be on the “to do” list. The headliner is a slightly complicated bit – we don’t know how that’s looking, either. The seller does provide views of the fronts of the floors, and other than heavy surface rust on the driver’s side, the sheet metal is acceptable. Externally, the original paint is worn, and a few dents are scattered across the panels.
Giovanni Michelotti – Triumph’s primary designer – worked with the Spitfire’s body to incorporate the sleek hatchback. In fact, the original coupe – rejected as a road car when fitted with the four-cylinder engine – was viewed as promising enough aerodynamically that Triumph made fiberglass tops mimicking the style for the track. That set the stage for marketing the new car once management settled on the bigger engine. Prospective GT6 buyers face a conundrum: which of the series to buy? The Mk I is designed with the hallmark upright grille of Michelotti’s original sketch; the Mk II gained improved suspension but suffered mandated bumper restrictions, and the Mk III offered further – though slight – mechanical evolution. I prefer the Mk I, but each to his own – what do you think?
Always like these cars. The original Spitfire shape always looked a little weird to me but when they put the top on them to make the GT-6 they hit every design nerve I had. To this day I’m not sure if one drove into my driveway with a for sale sign on it I’d own it in a heart beat.
Always liked these, but preferred the taillights on the later models. Too bad they never made a GT6 with the black bumpers. That would have looked really sharp.
I have a friend with a Spit 6, painted dark metallic green, with the black bumpers and indeed the color combination looks good!
To me, coming or going this is a handsome car. From a looks perspective, I’d go with one from this generation. I like the roof line from the rear view a lot. It ties in with the quarter panel lines really nicely. Great write up Michelle!!! Nice Triumph here.
I got stuffed into a ditch – with my then girlfriend – as we were in the back of a GT6 whose driver lifted when he shouldn’t have. The swing axle did its thing…
Spitwads had swing axles. GT6’s had IRS, right? Glad you survived the ditch!
The GT6’s rear suspension design evolved over the car’s production run with three distinct versions… the first was the basic swing spring used thru ’68… next came the “rotoflex” which was a full independent design. A lower wishbone was added and the transverse leaf spring was effectively the upper wishbone. The “rotoflex donut allowed axle articulation… this was used from ’69 thru ’72 (my ’72 Mk3 has this set up) the final design iteration was the “swing spring”… and was used in the GT6’s final year. This set-up allowed the transverse leaf to pivot at the center… the rotoflex set-up was eliminated. This final design had fewer parts, so it was lighter and cheaper… however there is some debate on whether it functioned as well as the “rotoflex”
Sorry, the first iteration was “swing axle”, not “swing spring”…
Oops… the initial design iteration was the “swing axle”… not “swing spring”…
as said w/today’s Sprint: top body style (long hood/FB/short deck/2+2 – well not the latter here). But… doesnt this 1 have a removable hrd top brother. I think I’ve even seen it (after mrkt co) in the FB style. I was very enamored w/@ least one other Brit in the day. MGB GT.
Derick & his domino made at least 3 so the weight was up on the lill mouse too. 2 stresses but thankfully not catastrophic for U 3~
For styling, I prefer the GT6+, but as the years wear on I am beginning to lean toward the Mk-3. I regret passing up the opportunity of purchasing a Mk-3 back in 1985. I am probably better off for passing up the opportunity to buy several GT6+ cars prior to that. By comparison, the GT6 cars that I drove were much more fun than the MGB-GT that I drove once. IMHO
Presently own a pair of GT6’s…Mk 2 & Mk 3, so I guess I have a soft spot in my heart (and head) for these. At the moment, I’m in the process of creating a car I have longed for—a GT6 convertible, aka Spit 6. Parts are still reasonably priced, the average individual with basic mechanical knowledge can maintain them, and a ton of fun to drive make the Triumph one of the cars “flying under the radar”. I own other exotics but my heart will forever remain with my LBC’s (Little British Cars).
My first car. My Ma said “graduate high school and I,ll buy you any car you want”. I told her i want the neighbors gt-6 100 bucks . She asked why. I told her “he gets every girl in town with that car”. It lasted a couple years until the swing axle and spindles went away.
For a 15 year old, it was a very quick car. So excited with it, after a few repairs upon purchase, I threw the steering wheel back on.
Took her out and ripped down the block but during my excitement I had forgotten that little thing called a nut that holds the wheel on!! True story
As the owner of a Mk3 I’m surprised at the ask for this one… considering it’s tired cosmetics. But maybe I’m just not keeping up with current values… If so, I probably should be on the phone with Hagerty to increase my ‘agreed to’ value.
OK, since you asked…….I like them in reverse order. The Mk III, my fave, was very clean, with no chrome strips hiding the panel welds on top of the bonnet and the rear quarters. Also thought the Mk III’s rear end styling was cleaner. All-in-all, a well-developed, integrated design. Next, the Mk II, which I owned. I liked the “dog bone-in-mouth” front bumper design. A lot of folks didn’t. The Rotoflex suspension was the other thing to like about the Mk II. Last place? The original, Mk I. Didn’t like the low placement of the front bumper, didn’t like the swing axle rear end. And, on Mk I and MK II, did not like the rear bumpers (bumperettes?) attached directedly to the body’s sheet metal. Nor did I like the tiny brake lights/turn signals. What’s to like on any Mark? That six cylinder engine: what a glorious lump! Make mine a Mk III, preferably in green, thanks.
Back in 1981 I worked as manager for a large waterbed chain. Took the manager job in Abilene,Tx, (worst redneck town ever) and hired a salesperson to help out. He purchased a GT6 about the same time I purchased a 74 X1/9. Had many a great time chasing each other around the local highways. Our cars were evenly matched which added to the fun. Swapped cars occasionally for even more fun. Really liked the GT6 for the power but that transmission tunnel was cooking after just a few minutes. I did prefer my X1/9 as it cornered much flatter than the GT6.
Ha, I had similar experiences with fellow employees and the owners were young so them too.
I had a 78 GT 5spd Celica after the GT-6 (and 68 Le Sabre) and it was from Michigan and didn’t have the same Ca emissions as I recall and it ripped.
I knew how to get the most out of that 20R.
My competition was a bosses new RX-7, a 914, a decked out 77 Celica and a V6 Capri. Good times!!!
I had a 1972 GT6 Mark 3
In Chicago it really needed A/C!
My first new car was a ’68 GT6 Mk 1, I loved that car super lines, power that outran Spits and Sprites, but those swing axles…aarrgghh! Never bit me, but the first time my little brother took it out, he returned looking white as a sheet. Yep, he had it tuck under on him. Fortunately lots of runoff area!
Put a few bucks into this one and it’ll be as sharp a car as you could wish for.
For me, the GT6 is much more desirable than a Spitfire; basic same car but a fixed top and bigger motor. I like the wheel package here and it looks like a good driver. For me 19K is a bit over the top but Someone who really wants it would pay that…. Neat car!!
This vehicle is priced way too high. Needs a full strip and repaint, and the floor repair. These are only pulling about 27,000.00 or so with near flawless paint/near show condition.
Between the paint and the floor, one will easily have $15,000.00 in it, and it still has those hideous wheels that should be wire knock-offs.
After owning a 78 Spit and a 71 TR6, I bought a 71 GT6 and built it into a Spit 6. 2.5L TR6 engine, triple Webers. CV joints in place of the Roto-flex and a later swing spring. After destroying 3 diffs in 6 years (very weak link), I built up a Mazda diff (similar to GRM magazine’s Ro-Spit project car’s diff). I’ve put a bit over 100k miles on it since the rebody. Back in the early-mid ’90s my then employer more than paid me for the car in mileage reimbursement – I was making weekly day trips from the Detroit area to Columbus OH and back-500 hundred miles in a day.
The car went on the lift a couple of days ago, clutch slave cylinder leaking aggressively and since it’s about to get hot, I’d rather drive the 61 Falcon (with A/C).