I hate the idea of every Tom, Dick and Ford buying up these old names-I don;t
think it keeps the name alive, I think it makes a mockery of our motoring
heritage. (Though I am a wee bit thankful to Ford for 'saving' Jaguar...I await
the F-Type with excitement and joy!)
But, no matter what sort of streamlined, psuedo-retro update they do of these
old cars-they are merely ghosts of the real thing! (And they all look alike!)
Has anyone seen the new T-Bird? Augh!
We enthusiats and we alone keep these names alive by restoring and driving the
real mccoy.
Just my 2 cents,
Laura (you'll never catch me dead in a repro) G.
>
>From: "Gascoigne, Andy" <Andy.Gascoigne@gov.ky>
>Date: Thu, 11 May 2000 12:01:29 -0500
>To: "'Tburke4@aol.com'" <Tburke4@aol.com>, jmcneal@ohms.com,
> Terrence.Banbury@dnr.state.oh.us, spitfires@autox.team.net
>Subject: RE: CNN reports BMW pays Phoenix to take over
>
>
>Fair point - but if they all thought like that, we wouldn't have got the
>MGF... whilst it's no Z3, it's probably the latter-day Spitfire we never
>had. Far better than Miatas et al (Why aren't they in the US, surely it
>would sell like nothing else - it's only around 20k in the UK, which means
>you'd get it for about 3 grand over there? ;-)
>
>I think all too often we are caught out by sentimentality and "heritage"
>then nearly go bust - so what happens? Every Tom Dick and Ford goes and buys
>the bl@@dy names!! (Aston, Rolls, Bentley, Jaguar, Rover, now even "Mini" !)
>
>Yet people still buy those 'marques' because of the name. Ford & VW have
>done a good job of making people buy their cars, who otherwise turn their
>noses up at them.
>
>I mainly like old cars 'cos they look nicer.
>
>Andy <a href="http://www.spitfires.net";>www.spitfires.net</a>
>68 Spitfire
>73 GT6
>71 Karmann Ghia
>95 Beetle
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Tburke4@aol.com [mailto:Tburke4@aol.com]
>Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 11:37 AM
>To: jmcneal@ohms.com; Terrence.Banbury@dnr.state.oh.us;
>spitfires@autox.team.net; technical@iwnet.screaming.net
>Subject: Re: CNN reports BMW pays Phoenix to take over
>
>
>
>Jeff,
>
>I have to say I even feel that way about some of the later model Triumphs
>like the Stag and the TR8. They had great performance and reflected a modern
>
>approach to what a sports car could be, but, the molded plastic and "modern"
>
>car-building materials took Triumph far away from the TR2-3-4/Spitfire
>simplicity that I find so appealing, particularily for restoration. No
>offense to the Stag/TR8 guys (they are the bravest of the parts hunters),
>just my personal taste.
>
>A "NEW" Triumph would necessarily be a competitor to the Z3, S2000, etc. and
>
>it would, as you say, have little in common with our cars, besides the name.
>
>You can't go home again,
>
>Tom Burke
>80 Spit (which still can't leave home, either)
>
>In a message dated 05/11/2000 7:54:40 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
>jmcneal@ohms.com writes:
>
><< Terry,
>
> Here's the way I feel about it. The true Triumph marque died out many
>years
> ago. Just seeing the name on a new car wouldn't ignite the same passion in
> me. Or if it did, the $30,000 + price tag would quickly douse the flame.
> The whole appeal of these cars -- at least from my standpoint -- is that
> they reflect the era from which they were built. The history, the ease of
> working under the bonnet, the unrefined ride where you feel every bump in
> the road, the fear of having something blow up or fall off during high revs
> and sharp turns -- all these elements (and more) would be lost on a newly
> manufactured car. >>
>
|