>I agree completely! Roadster are much better drivers than many
>of their contemporaries - they SHOULD be driven.
>Driven is what Datsun/Nissan is about, yes?
>
>I can't see them becoming trailer queens in the US within the next 15-20
>years.
>I imagine that could happen in Japan, but I doubt it here.
>
>Post it to the list if you like, help the cause,
>Jim
>
>
>
>
>jtyler..snip..
>> >Our cars are similar or better in terms of aesthetics, vintage and
>> >performance to other cars which are bringing more.
>> >Thus the market needs correcting. In our case
>> >appraising won't work, so other measures are more likely to work. There
>> >is no good reason Triumph's, MG's, etc., should ever be worth more.
>>
>>
>Marc Tyler wrote:
>> You know, you're right there. TR-4s are *really* pricey, dunno quite
>> why. Racing heritage? Bob sharp used to wipe the floor with them!
>>
>> And you're right on another count. I used to see a lot of beater
>> roadsters when I lived in LA. Maybe there is a perception that this is a
>> cheapo convertible that you can ride hard for a few years and
>> discard...hmmm. Kinda like Fiat Spyders. I think maybe we should get
>> these cars past the disposeable ride niche. You convinced me. I guess I
>> have an aversion to trailer queens though, unless it's a 1932 Packard
>> Phaeton,or a Duesenberg ;-) Roadsters should be driven, I think.
>>
>> Marc T.
|