triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Primary Car

To: Triumph List <triumphs@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: Primary Car
From: Roger Elliott <relliott@cjnetworks.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 21:19:31 -0600
References: <LOBBKPPMMJIJFEMPLEMOOEPDDHAA.millerb@netusa1.net>
Amen,  I reread Ken's message a couple of times after people started complaining
and I still see it as a light hearted jibe.  You can just as easily assume that
you are being called brave instead of stupid.

I frequently joke about no one being able to be able to call me rational as
evidenced by my ownership of 4 Triumphs at the moment.

Roger Elliott

Bill Miller wrote:

> Hey everybody lighten up and take this the way most likely Ken meant it.
> Triumphs have never been known for their "reliability"  Every LBC I've ever
> owned I've worked on it just as much as I have driven it.  But I *like* to
> work on them!!  We are all a little "nuts" to love these *at least* 20 year
> old cars the way we do!  Who in there "right mind* would save some of these
> rusted out hulks, restore them, and spend more to restore 20-40 yr car than
> buy a new one (with A/C!)  We are all crazy.  Think about how much you work
> on, bust knuckles on, and love every minute of it.  Any "sane" man would
> question our hobby.  I personally drive a car built 40 yrs ago, before I was
> born (I'm only 35) whenever I get the opportunity.  I certainly work on it
> more than I do the old "LBC support vehicle" in the driveway.  I remember
> back in High School my friends saying I must be a masochist to own a
> spitfire that I had to drive for two weeks and spend the next week(end)
> working on it. (Balancing carbs, etc.)  I certainly didn't take offense with
> his comment.  I laughed.  Just as Ken intended for me too.  Why would he be
> on this list if he thought we were all stupid.  Lighten up.  Geesh.
>
> Bill


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>