Hi Mike:
Thank you for articulating what I attempted unsuccessfully to do by
inference. As you say, there is nothing wrong with the MGF or the Lumina
or any of today's wundercars. I enjoy their technology and have nothing to
criticize about their execution.
By going back to their roots designers have maintained a tradition in many
successful automobiles over the years. Styling cues have been the major
links between models for years. On MGs the original grille idea was
maintained through every model and was always recognizably MG. Buick had
its portholes and Cadillac its fins. Wolseley had the lighted oval badge
and Austin the winged/flying A.
Inside the car an MG always had a certain similarity with the use of round
instruments and a generous sprinkling of octagons. This didn't change
significantly over the years - except that the execution was cheapened in
appearance.
Dramatic changes have not always been successful in retaining a traditional
custom. Look at the debacle of Cadillac in the '80s when the company tried
desperately to create a new market by abandoning old principles.
as to retro-styling being anathema to our young gen-Xers how do you explain
the surge in popularity for cocktail culture? Without retro-styling a
Rolls would be just a ridiculously overpriced luxury car which does nothing
particularly well. Without the tradition of speed and performance from
Bentleys why would anyone by the Turbo R?
Tradition is written all over the progressive and subtle changes at
Merdedes. While the new cars and the cars of the '50s and '60s have little
in common technologically, they are still very obviously Mercedes products.
BMW has retained the 328 grille for over 60 years.
These kinds of "going back to the roots" are what I am referring to. I am
not advocating - as the short-fused members of the list seem to infer -
that we should go back to making an MGB. I am advocating that Rover needs
to take a long hard look at what an MG represents and find a way to
incorporate that soul into the new car. It will be difficult with the
present egg obsession. A great car has visible character. Let's see some.
Porsche did it, although it must be admitted that they started with an egg
back in '48.
John McEwen
>At 03:02 PM 12/14/97 +0000, you wrote:
>As for 'gluing on a badge', that is how it all began anyway, and the modern MG
>>saloons replicated that albeit not from a discrete workforce, but they
>still have
>>a loyal following. How many detractors have owned one themselves, I
>wonder? The
>>MGF has a direct parallel with the MGB - purpose designed body containing
>>many
>>corporate parts. The days of a discrete workforce designing and building
>the car
>>and all its components are long gone, but does that make the MGA and MGB
>any less
>>worthy?
>Cynicism, or rose-tinted spectacles, may well hamper the viewer from
>appreciating
>>worthy products.
>PaulH.
>
>No, no, no: everyone is missing the point, or applying intent where it was
>not. There are many GREAT cars that aren't MGs. But what is a marque? Is it
>simply a badge. Stick one on and there, that's done, another MG. Could MG
>use a sport-ute? Stick a badge on a Freelander and presto, MG sport-ute?
> Or is a marque a tradition, a baton of design philosophy passed from one
>'generation' of designers and builders to another? Which of the MG badged
>cars had no imput from someone with solid ties to Abingdon or Morris
>Garages? That car is simply a 'whatever' badged as an MG.
> The MGF is a superb car, that was never questioned by me. In fact I think
>it is quite possibly an MG in the truest sense of the marque. But for there
>to truly be an MG marque considered alive and well, there MUST be some
>continuity. I'm not saying that there isn't. I don't have a clue as to how
>the MG company is set up within Rover. What degree of autonomy does it have?
> I understand that there isn't enough MG production by modern standards to
>justify a team of designers who work on nothing but MG products. But is
>there ANYBODY in Rover who thinks they are primarily MG, rather than a Rover
>guy/girl who works on MGs? In the days of the B on back, there were people
>who considered themselves MG people, not Leyland/BMC/Morris people.
> If there is, then we have the beginnings of MG living again. If not, then
>we're allowing ourselves into being duped. What we'd have would be a couple
>of good/very good cars that happen to have an octagon stuck on. It doesn't
>detract from the quality of the cars -- it simply means that there isn't a
>Marque, in the traditional sense. It would take very rosy glasses indeed to
>see one where it ain't.
>
>Michael, New Bern, NC
>
|