At 07:26 AM 06-06-05, you wrote:
> You've injected some valid points into your arguement, and alot of what
> I've said depends on someone buying and saving the MGTF. That's still
> very much up in the air.
Hopefully, we will know something on June 10th when PWC are scheduled to
hold a "meeting on the companies affairs". Whether that will involve
naming the successful bidder(s) remains to be seen.
>You mentioned the idea that MG-Rover could have arranged a co-marketing
>agreement with some other manufacturer. I don't think that anyone would
>have been overenthusiastic after what happened with the Sterling. Also,
>Morgan is a low volume specialty operation. They didn't need but a couple
>of dealers in the US, and would have been hard-pressed to supply too many
>more. The waiting list's already quite long. The MGTF was more mass
>produced. But it's not being produced at all right now.
Surprisingly, Morgan make all their cars compliant with US regulations
instead of going the kit car route like Noble, so if a little firm like
Morgan can meet the requirements MG's new owners should have no trouble
doing so.
>Once again, assuming someone steps to the rescue, they're going to want to
>make a profit, and the US is one of the bigger automotive markets in the
>world, if not the biggest. Also, we're nuts for retro-style cars,
>nameplates, etc. If the white knight materializes and the car is saved, it
>would be in their favor to get it in here if possible.
True, the US is a big market and was once seen as indispensable to the
viability of British sports cars. However, it is also a very competitive
market and I don't know if the MGTF could be priced low enough to compete
and yet still be profitable. That said, I believe it outsells the Mazda
MX-5 in Britain, so perhaps it can? I think another big reason MGR did
not wade into this market when the F came out was that they did not want to
end up losing money on every car they sold like the MGB in later years.
>Now, you brought up crash protection and engine location. If it comes to
>making a change to the car to get it in here, I'll bet that the average
>man on the street here is unaware of that car's present setup, and would
>not care that it might have looked a bit different a couple of years ago,
>or that the engine had been moved closer to the front. I know making
>changes like that isn't cheap or easy sometimes. There's also the chance
>that it might be workable as-is.
Essentially it meets the standards already. See www.mgfusa.com for
details. Some minor tweaking may be necessary with respect to bumper
specs. & lights etc. Morgan trashed 17 cars meeting the standards for one
of their new models. I'll bet MG would only need a handful.
>Yes, I'm eaten up with wishful thinking about this. I also know that
>anything or nothing could happen. Not all of the car makers in the world
>want to deal with US regulations, and this might end up being the case for
>any future owner of the MGTF design. I'm just not ready to give up the
>idea yet. As reasonable as you are, I'm afraid we're at an impasse on this one.
The TF is coming here one way or the other. If the new owner does not want
to deal with US regs, then we will go the kit car route!
Regards,
Brad Wilson
www.mgfusa.com
www.wedgeparts.com Yes, a Triumph site that supports MG! Let's put that
silly nonsense to rest too. The TF is the worthy successor to both the MGB
and the TR7/8!
|