[Fot] MG vs. Triumph

[Rocky Entriken]

When I was a kid, my dad had a girlfriend who had an MG TD. She didn't stick 
around long .. probably a good thing as the woman he later married was the 
World's Greatest Mom. Triumph not even in  the game yet and MG already has a 
score of nil.

First sports car I ever drove in anger was my brother's MGA. Oh, yeah! 
Hooked. MG 1, Triumph ?.

Came home to Lawrence, Ks., and went down to the British Motors dealer. He 
had an MG Midget on the lot in my price range. On the test drive it wandered 
all over the place. Salesman said that was normal. I didn't know enough 
about cars then to understand why, just that I didn't like it. Another 
missed score.

So I visited the Triumph store. Hadn't even heard much about them, but there 
was a little baby blue (Wedgewood Blue) '64 Spitfire on the lot in my price 
range. Felt nice and tight and responsive. Also it had those sleek Italian 
lines compared to the MG's squared-off design. And the owner of the store 
had a TR-4A that he RACED! Way cool. Bought the Spitfire. That was 1966. 
Still have it. Not baby blue any more (except for a little patch on the cowl 
I purposely never painted over) and it became a race car in 1971.

MG 3-and-out. Triumph won on its first play.

--Rocky Entriken

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Curry" <spitlist at cox.net>
To: <triumphs at autox.team.net>; <fot at autox.team.net>
Sent: Saturday, January 23, 2010 7:54 PM
Subject: [Fot] MG vs. Triumph


>I saw this in Sept 09 Automobiles Magazine and thought I'd share:
>
> "You can be forgiven if the names don't mean anything to you.  One is a 
> pair
> of initials currently being slapped on Chinese-built Rover sedans; the 
> other
> is a word usually used to reference old, oil-leaking motorcycles.  Neither
> has appeared on a new car in this country in more than twenty-five years,
> but once, both were household names.
>
> In the decades following WWII, British Marques MG and Triumph essentially
> created the stateside market for the low-cost, high-fun roadster.  By
> packaging pedestrian sedan components into rakish, droptop bodies, they
> introduced thousands of people to the joys of cornering and all but 
> invented
> the wind-in-hair grin.  And while the two companies battled each other in
> grand style at places like LeMans and the N|rburgring, the real contest 
> took
> place in showrooms.
>
> It came down to a difference in personality: Triumph were raucous, snarly
> little things, all torque and attitude, while MGs were more refined, often
> slower, but usually better built.  The dichotomy regularly carried over 
> into
> ownership: According to lore, MG people wore string-back driving gloves 
> and
> saw Triumph jocks as hairy-eared brutes; Triumph people ate raw meat and
> thought driving gloves were for dandy fops who drank light beer through a
> straw.  Charmingly, each side was to be secretly in love with each other.
>
> MG and Triumph faded out of the U.S. market in the early 80's, victims of
> corporate avarice and terminal mismanagement.  Triumph later went 
> belly-up;
> MG, although still technically alive, has spent the past two decades on
> badge-engineered life support.  All told, it was an ignominious end to one
> of the automotive industries more likable duels."
>
> Sam Smith
>
> Cheers,
> Joe Curry
> _______________________________________________
>
> Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
>
> Suggested annual donation $12.96
>
> You are subscribed as rocky at spitfire4.com
>
> http://www.fot-racing.com
>
>
> Fot at autox.team.net
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/fot
>
> Brought to you by Team.Net consulting - Unix software specialist.