At 12:00 PM 11/28/97 -0700, you wrote:
>I think what was being pointed out Re: TR-7, shape of
>things to come was: X1/9, Fiero, MR2, loads of things
>with prancing horses on 'em...
Sorry, X1/9 (among others) predates tr-7
> My TR-7 survived the rain soaked days of
>Arkansas far better than anything I've got from
>Abingdon. The heads fail? Try getting more HP out
>a B-series engine and you can practically hear
>the head cracking. The gearboxes were weak? And
>that wonder in the A-series Midget was the best
>thing to ever grace a sports car (not!). A lot
>of those old sports cars had a lot of problems.
>There are ways to fix 'em on a TR-7 as well
>as an MG. Of course the '8 was a better car, but
>then the thing was designed for that engine.
>If more '8s had been built, or the standard
>TR-7 had the sprint engine, I think things
>might have been different.
First off, the TR-7 should've been superior to those cars, given a decade of
car development. Each of the other cars had some of the problems you list,
but the TR-7 had them ALL. Beside, it is a simple fact that the TR-7 had
more warranty claims against it than any other BL product excepting the
AAauto. That is no marque bias but simple fact. And the poor ol' crippled B
continued to out sell it!
And it was UGLY, at least until the advent of the convertible, which
helped. And others have pointed out that you could round this, stretch that
and it would be good looking and yadda yadda -- but they DIDN'T round this
or stretch that!
Some people love 'em, however. Of course, some people think the Brady Bunch
was great TV -- must be the plaid.
Michael, New Bern, NC
|