Wow Murray, my 8 doesn't behave that way. What am I doing wrong? Surely an
intelligent, tasteful, mannered bloke like yourself wouldn't lead me astray.
John
murray arundell wrote:
> Kelvin,
>
> Only two problems with your theory re TR-7/8.
>
> 1) No matter what engine you put into it sooner or later you still had to
> look at the ugliest car ever produced!
> 2) The Triumph was produced at a strike ridden plant that could never
> produce a quality product. The public new it and stayed
> away in droves..... Days lost to strikes at MGs were NIL! Fact.
>
> One further point, old it may have been, but the MGB out lasted the Triumph
> (stand corrected here). Also do not forget that the TR 7/8 was an evil
> understeering beast from which major components tended to fall off
> periodically! (See point 2)
>
> Cheers (in a friendly flamed way)
> Murray Arundell
> Brisbane Aus,
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Dodd, Kelvin <doddk@mossmotors.com>
> To: Tic Tac Group <uga4300@hotmail.com>
> Cc: <mgb-v8@autox.team.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, December 08, 1999 4:18 AM
> Subject: RE: MGB-V8 History
>
> > Zach:
> >
> > I will jump in.
> >
> > I don't think mismanaged is the best way to put it. The MGB
> > platform was very dated by the time the V8 concept came out. There was no
> > money for updating the platform to a more modern design. The MGB V8 was a
> > smooth, powerful, expensive engine installed in a unrefined outdated
> > chassis. Keep in mind the MGB chassis was designed in 1961. It was then
> > 1973. The press complaints at the time of introduction said it all. The
> > car had a harsh suspension, too much windnoise and a low level of interior
> > luxury for the price. They loved the engine, but were disapointed with
> the
> > dated platform. The target market was young executives, who wanted a
> flash
> > high performance vehicle. The MGB GT V8 was competing with cars such as
> the
> > Ford Capri V6 which had similar performance, seated 4 and had a higher
> > available trim level, for a lower cost. Despite the lovely motor and
> marque
> > fame, the MGB GT V8 was just not competitive in the marketplace.
> >
> > Now we look back with rosy fogged hindsight and make silly comments
> > about the car that would have saved MG. An MGB has a wonderful vintage
> > flavor to it. That flavor is what makes it a beloved machine. Vintage
> > flavor does not sell automobiles in a competitive mass market. British
> > Leyland was not The Morgan Car Co. It could not support a limited market
> > low volume vehicle.
> >
> > Now I am going to get flamed out the wazoo. The best thing IMHO
> > that BL could have done was to dump the MGB and use a crystal ball to
> ignore
> > the roll over debate and get the TR8 convertible into production before
> > 1974. The TR7 shell was a well developed modern structure with well
> located
> > suspension. Interior space and comfort were good. Ride quality was
> > excellent (too soft by some standards). The TR8 in hard (preferably
> > fastback) or soft top could have given the competition a run for the
> money.
> > Just as the Capri was available with a lower level engine, the TR7 with
> > suitable 4 cylinder would have been an excellent entry level vehicle. The
> > original Saab 99 engine was designed by Triumph. If the engine
> progression
> > had of been paralleled, many of the design flaws in the TR7 2.0L would
> have
> > been solved. Could you imagine a 16 valve version of the Triumph engine
> > with the same reliability as the Saab 900 engine. Instead of allowing the
> > MGB to soldier on with reduced power and antiquated handling, could you
> > imagine a line of TR7 platform vehicles. Starting with a base 8 valve, up
> > to an injected V8. Body styles including CVT, fastback, or sportwagon
> (ala
> > Jensen Healey). Ok, this is from a die hard MGB fan. But I keep my eyes
> > wide open to the limitations of the MGB design.
> >
> > regards
> >
> > Kelvin.
> >
> >
> > Kelvin.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Quick question: When BMC produced the MGB-V8 how was it
> > > mismanaged and what
> > > could they have done better?
> > > Thanks for your time
> > > Zach
> > >
> >
|