mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: TR7 - Good or Bad?

To: mmcewen@gpu.srv.ualberta.ca (John McEwen),
Subject: Re: TR7 - Good or Bad?
From: Ray McCrary <spook01@mindspring.com>
Date: Thu, 04 Dec 1997 15:41:14 -0600
Wonder which US company will buy RR now that its' for sale?
Ray

 At 11:27 AM 12/2/97 -0500, John McEwen wrote:
>Hi Philip:
>
>While I realize that I neglected to mention it, as I had assumed that my
>e-mail address would announce the fact, I am not an American but a proud
>member of the Commonwealth and recognize Elizbeth II as the Queen of
>Canada.  I have owned many LBCs and FBBs (Fast British Bikes) over a period
>of 40 years and feel qualified to make statements about them.  I might add
>that I drove my first LBC in 1954 - even though I was not yet old enough to
>be licensed.
>
>The American automobile industry suffered from three major obstacles during
>the past 25 years.  One was competition from Japan, the next was
>environmental legislation and the third was two major gasoline crises.  The
>quality of the vehicles was never a question.  The concept of the vehicle
>was.  Yes, the American auto industry suffered from an unwillingness to
>address the problem directly, but it was caught by the distractions of
>environmental needs which sucked up its R&D money and a gasoline crisis
>which made its most profitable vehicles unsaleable.
>
>American automobile companies had been building small, fuel efficient
>automobiles since the late thirties.  However, they sold to a minority and
>in some cases resulted in the failure of the parent company.  They were not
>in demand on a continent with vast distances and abundant fuel.
>Automobiles such as the Willys, the Hudson Jet and the Henry J were brave
>attempts to sell economy and efficiency.  They didn't sell.
>
>The Volkswagen began the pressure toward modern small automobiles in North
>America, coupled with the 1958 recession and the resulting success of the
>Rambler which began life in 1950 but was initially not well-received.
>These were followed by the highly successful Ford Falcon, Plymouth Valiant
>and Chevrolet Corvair.  These were subsequently replaced by the Ford
>Maverick and Pinto, Chevrolet Vega and Pontiac Astre.  Small fuel-efficient
>cars were common in North America all through the '60s and '70s - they just
>didn't sell as well as the bread and butter cars.
>
>During the fifties, many LBCs were sold in North America but their largest
>sales period was in the late forties when anything new would sell to a
>car-starved population.  Here in Canada, LBCs were much more common on a
>per capita basis than in the US, with the exception of California and
>sportscars.  Canadians had stronger and more traditional ties to the UK
>than the US.
>
>You speak of of today's Britain.  I am talking about the seventies when the
>collapse in British manufacture took place.  Yes, there are some wonderful
>British products being built today.  There are also some wonderful products
>being built throughout the world.  Britain was a world-leader and dropped
>the ball.
>
>Today, how much of the British industry is British owned?  You compare the
>Corvette to the XK8.  Ford owns Jaguar, GM owns Corvette.  Compare the
>price.  Here in Canada, an XK8 costs nearly twice as much as a Corvette.  I
>would expect it to be a better car.  As to determining the quality of
>materials from examining the cars on the stand at an auto show,  I am not
>sure what you mean.  Perhaps the Jaguar has real wood.  Did you compare the
>chassis by lying on the floor to look at them or the engines by examining
>their internal construction?  I am quite certain that the Corvette will
>still be running long after the Jaguar has become recycled steel.  American
>automobiles have bee the world's best, without question, in terms of
>durability and cost of operation over the long term.  This was true in the
>'30s to the '70s.  It will probably be true in the '90s.
>
>You mention the large number of Japanese cars in the US.  This is true
>because the Americans are no fools.  The Japanese build an excellent car
>and more important, they build it in the US at a competitive price.  Nearly
>every Japanese manufacuturer has a US factory.  For that matter, the Honda
>Gold Wing motorcycle - the world's best touring bike - is manufactured only
>in the US and has been since 1981.
>
>You mention the new British Triumph Motorcycle.  This excellent machine is
>manufactured in Britain, in a new purpose-built plant, and is owned by
>largely British interests.  However, many if not most of its components are
>manufactured elsewhere, principally in Germany, Italy and Japan.  This is
>typical of the world today.
>
>You mention Harley-Davidson.  Yes, the design of this machine is antiquated
>but this is by choice.  The choice of the customer.  The machine is
>thoroughly modern in all other respects and features many Japanese and
>Italian parts because they are the best.  H-D production is still largely
>spoken-for prior to manufacture and there are still waiting lists.  In
>fact, the H-D is rather like what many of us have wished for - a "new" MG.
>It is a vehicle which evokes the traditions of the past in a new
>embodiment.  It is also incredibly successful.
>
>As to telephone advances, I have no doubt there are better systems.  Don't
>lose sight of the fact that all of Britain would fit into my province of
>Alberta - with room left over for Italy and Alberta is only the
>fourth-largest province.  These kinds of distances make changes to
>transmission systems very costly and difficult.  We will get these
>improvements in time - if the cost can be justified in dramatic
>improvements.  As to improvements in radio systems, most cars today use
>compact disc systems with much less demand for radio being manifested.
>Radio is somewhat of a dying industry in North America.
>
>BTW, do people in Britain still drive at night without using their
>headlamps?  When I questioned this system some years ago, my uncle replied
>that this was done to "save the electricity".
>
>John McEwen
>
>
>
>
>>>This car had lots of company.  The failure of the British motorcycle
>>>industry at the same time was due to exactly the same reasons.  A kind of
>>>national arrogance, unwillingness to commit to forward planning, sloppy
>>>construction, building to a price (low), general inability to recognize and
>>>react to superior competition, and complete disinterest on the part of
>>>stockholders saw the world's largest and most successful motorcycle industy
>>>disappear in the space of a decade.  It was merely a harbinger of the death
>>>of the British auto industry which was among the world's largest just a
>>>three decades before.
>>
>>
>>>How could names like Austin, Morris, MG, Sunbeam, Triumph completely
>>>disappear without a massive national outcry?  Imagine the reaction in the
>>>US if Chevrolet, Ford, Dodge, Lincoln, Cadillac and Chrysler simply
>>>disappeared as automobile marques in a few short years - to be replaced by
>>>Japanese, Korean and European vehicles.  Imagine the response in the US if
>>>BMW, Volkswagen, Mercedes, Honda and Toyota simply bought every American
>>>nameplate and replaced them with clones of their own products.  It happened
>>>in Britain.
>>
>>Now hang on, an American calling the British arrogant?? :-)
>>
>>I've seen far more Japanese cars in the US than in Britain or Europe. The
>>US car industry was a joke until a couple of years ago, when it pulled
>>its socks up and started trying to catch up with foreign imports.
>>
>>In fact, I looked at some US offerings at the London Motor Show and was
>>disappointed at the poor quality engineering and materials. Just compare
>>a 98 Corvette with a 98 Jaguar and you'll see what I mean.
>>
>>And you mention motorcycles: Take a look at a modern all-British Triumph
>>and compare it with an argricultural Harley Davidson. :-)
>>
>>Some British car companies may be owned by foreign investors, but at
>>least they produce decent products.
>>
>>There's nothing unusual in this foreign investment - British companies
>>are very good at buying US companies. Look at Burger King - owned by
>>Britain, but still very much American.
>>
>>There seems to be an arrogance among some Americans that makes them think
>>that they are the most technologically advanced country on earth. But the
>>USA is about the only part of the world where you can't use a GSM digital
>>phone - you're still struggling with analogue, your car radios don't
>>boast RDS, and you're not adopting digital radio broadcasting next year.
>>Ummm, glad I live in good ol' Blightly.
>>
>>Having said all this, you're a good bunch generally, so don't take this
>>badly! ;-)
>>
>>
>>
>>Philip Raby
>>Editor, MG World
>>PO Box 163, Bicester OX6 3YS, UK
>>Tel: 01869 340061 Fax: 01869 340063 Mobile 0467 767361
>>www.chp.ltd.uk
>
>
>

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>