Ohhhhhhhh Mr. Oritt,
Here I thought we had settled our discussion amiably off List with you
stating: "Sorry for the unnecessary conflict." and attaching a picture
of your 100 with some sort of a hardtop???
I don't know why you have to be surreptitious with "some BN1 owner" when
everybody knows it's me, Bill Barnett from the South Left Coast USA or
Mr. Bill to you. Actually I'm glad you decided to drag this back out in
public AGAIN because I would like to ask for the collective wisdom of
our worldwide group.
In our off List correspondence I asked Mr. Oritt: "What I originally
questioned was how you decided that our cars should 'properly be called
a 100 Lemans' and 'calling the car an M is wrong'. Is this your
nomenclature? If so, who appointed you the authority? If not, please
direct me to your reference and I will publicly apologize to you. If it
is to be Lemans, which of the three spellings you have used is
correct?" (LeMans or Le Mans)
Mr. Oritt chose to completely ignore my simple questions. Can anyone on
our List help bail him out?
Many thanks for your patience and with your help, we can put this much
overworked terminology silliness to rest.
Bill
'53 Red Car
Awgertoo@aol.com wrote:
> Tadek--
>
> Just because it says it is an M does not mean it really is one. I am
> scrupulous about calling my 100 LeMans just what it is--others are not so
>(just
> last week some BN1 owner felt it proper to cal his car an M because it had
> apparently been modified to M-specs. In any cae it thus it is entirely
> possible/probable that this is simply a non-M car.
>
> Best--Michael Oritt. 100 LeMans
_______________________________________________
Support Team.Net http://www.team.net/donate.html
Healeys@autox.team.net
http://autox.team.net/mailman/listinfo/healeys
http://www.team.net/archive
|