As an "MG guy" since 1971, I am struck by how often this comment has been
made in the history of the MG marque.
In 1936, the parent corporate reigns pulled in on the MG Car Company, and
the British auto magnate, Lord Nufflield, dictated that MG should stop
building fast, cheap, technologically-advanced overhead cam and supercharged
cars for the sporting sub-elite of the English gentry. Use generic parts
from the corporate bin, Cecil Kimber was told. And a lot of people
proclaimed "The MG marque is dead." And so it was, in a way. The MG-TA,
with its sedan-derived pushrod motor of relatively low RPM was not the same
buzz-bomb that had dominated small car racing as did the MG-J, MG-K, and
MG-L-series MG's of the earlier 1930's. When the TC gave way to the TD in
1949, the introduction to MG of independent front suspension and rack and
pinion steering gave rise to the same comment. How could it be a "real
sports car" with the suspension of a four-door saloon? And the TF....now
considered perhaps the most stylish of the early "square-rigger" MG's, did
not sell particularly well-- people lamented the lossing big chrome
headlights to the pandering dictates of BMC product planners. And so it
went, even with the introduction of the rakish MGA and the timeless MGB
(geez! a "sportscar" with roll-up windows!!!).
Every iteration of the marque leaves something nostalgic behind, yet
introduces new life in its own way. Nuffield to British Motor Corporation
in the '50's, to British Leyland, to Rover, to a string of unknown investors
and holding groups, to the most recent divestiture from BMW to whoever these
guys are, the connection to "the real MG marque" is tenuous at best, but
about as direct as any of our conections to our great grandparents-- a
pretty small fraction at best.
A number of years ago, I had a chance to drive one of the first MG-F's when
Ford brought one over to study it's "steer-by-wire" system (now there's a
frightening thought when you consider it was a Lucas product!). Beyond the
vestigal shape of the logo and the grill, I noticed no resemblance to my
1969 MGB, my 1968 Midget, or my 1953 MG-TD. But my old man's '86 LTD didn't
seem to have much in common with his '53 Crestliner either, and they came
off the same assemblyline on the Rouge River in Detroit. The new MG was a
thrill to drive-- just knowing that it was a sportscar with an octagon,
built in the UK by guys quafing pints in a pub after work, just like they
did in the 60's, the 50's, and even the 30's. It wasn't a Miata, an MR-2,
or a Sentra. It was some sort of MG! Good deal. Gives us some more over
here.
Hey, I say, Keep it up, blokes! Can't afford it right now, but hell, I
can't afford a Jag or an Aston either...er, I mean an English Ford.
[now, to get down from the soapbox.....]
=======================================================
Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2002 10:03:46 -0700
From <type88 at ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Re: Newest MG??
For $90,000 from a semi-non-existant company?
The MG marque is dead. The Healey marque is dead. So is Bugatti, Duesenberg,
DeSoto, Plymouth, etc. etc.
To paraphrase a US political candidate: "I own an MG, and that's no MG."
Dave Winchester
/// unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net or try
/// http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
/// Archives at http://www.team.net/archive/spridgets
|