Richard (and all)
Let me further clarify this situation (as my recollection goes)
1. Someone mentioned the article on the list and cited the details without
saying what the source of the data was.
2. I replied with the data from my source (Anders Clausager of the BMIHT).
3. The comments probably can be attributed to me as they do reflect my
feelings about anybody who spouts information without any
proper credentials or credible source. Since none was given, it appeared that
was the case.
4. I never gave my permission to use my name in any derogatory article
published in any club magazine.
5. Had the fact that the information was taken from Robson's book, "A
Collector's Guide, Triumph Spitfire and GT6", I would have
looked it up and found that it is indeed there. But is quite misleading. In
reading the data, it would appear that the US 1500
production started with FM28001 and went forward from there. There is a small
mention in the MkIV data above which mentions "FM prefix
for USA 1500's".
This is quite misleading because some people think that the 1500 serial
sequence is intermingled with the FH series starting with the
MkIV. It is not! the FM sequence was started separately from the FH series in
1973 with FM1 to designate the USA Spitfire 1500
model. It continued until 1980 when the VIN sequence replaced both the FH and
FM models. THe FH series, on the other hand was indeed
a continuation of the MkIV series and had a few FL (Sweden) and all the FK
(USA) cars included in that sequence. The FM series stands
alone.
6. I have the utmost respect for Graham Robson and fully appreciate the work he
has done in his writings about the Triumph cars (as
well as other British Marques). Certainly his proximity to the source of the
information gives him an advantage in accumulating such
data, but doesn't give him a monopoly on the facts. As he states, the data
from BMIHT has varied over time, but this issue of the US
Spitfires in my estimation is a major blunder, and the facts speak for
themselves.
Regards,
Joe
Richard B Gosling wrote:
>
> Easy, easy everyone - I think people are getting a little hot under the
> collar!!
>
> For the benefit of anyone who feels this is getting a little personal, I
> suspect that each side is not fully aware of the other sides history - so
>here
> it is as I have seen it as an observer, both a member of Club Triumph and the
> Spitfire List. Please feel free to correct any inaccuracy as you see it (I'm
> sure you will).
>
> The article originally appeared in the March issue of Club Torque. This
> article listed Spitfire chassis numbers, as taken from Graham Robsons book.
>
> For some reason the subject came up on the Spitfire List (can't remember how).
> The figures from Club Torque were mentioned, the magazine was mentioned as
>the
> source, Graham's name was not mentioned.
>
> Joe's data was published on the list, but not, it would appear, by Joe - first
> line of the message is "From Joe Curry re Spitfire facts and figures. See
> comments between the lines below: these are from the BMIHT!". The response
> was forwarded to Derek Pollock (editor of Club Torque) by a member of both
> Club and List, Derek forwarded it onto Graham. The response mentioned Joe as
> the source of the data. The response, originally sent to the List, also
> carried phrases such as "I'd question the source of the person who wrote
> that!" These, as far as I can tell, ARE NOT JOE'S WORDS, but those of
>whoever
> forwarded Joe's info to the List - this would seem to be the case as Joe (and
> Andy Mace) are referred to in the comments in the Third Person. At the
>moment
> the identity of this person remains a mystery.
>
> Graham then sends his reply to Club Torque, and it is printed in the May issue
> along with the message from the List. At this point everything seems to have
> got a little personal, so I'll avoid making any more comment on the History
> from this point!
>
> Please, gents, let's calm this down. You are both going to be at the
> Triumphest in San Diego it appears - I hope the meeting is convivial!
>
> Richard Gosling
>
> spitlist@gte.net on 17May2000 04:37 PM
>
> To: Richard B Gosling/1M/Caterpillar@Caterpillar
> cc:
> Subject: Re: Spitfire chassis numbers
> Retain Until: 16/06/2000 Retention Category: G90 - Information and
> Reports
> Caterpillar Confidential: Green
>
> Richard,
> Since I sent my earlier reply, I got to thinking about this issue. And I am a
> bit confused. How did my name get brought up in this
> publication so that Graham Robson knows who was "Rubbishing his integrity" He
> definitely has me at a disadvantage, because My comments
> were in response to someone's unattributed quote, not a direct reflection on
> Graham's integrity. So how did my comment from the
> internet get into "Club Torque" and create this firestorm?
>
> Regards,
> Joe
>
> Richard B Gosling wrote:
> >
> > Joe,
> >
> > Remember a couple of months back, 'Club Torque' (the magazine of Club
>Triumph
> > in the UK) published Spitfire chassis numbers, and there was some
>discussion
> > over their accuracy - you produced a different set of number for some
> models?
> > Well, next issue, a couple of months down the line, and your e-mail has
>been
> > published, along with a reply from the guy responsible for the original set
> of
> > numbers in 'Club Torque'.
> >
> > You may well have already seen a copy of this, but just in case you haven't,
> > here's the reply (be warned, you seem to have pushed his button!):
> >
> > Dear Derek (Pollock that is, Editor of Club Torque),
> > Thank you for letting me se the obviously disbelieving rant about Triumph
> > Spitfire production from someone in the USA. The implication about my
> > quotation of Spitfire production figures is that I made up everything to
> suit
> > myself. Well - I object to that. All production figures and all chassis
> > number details, first, last, changeover, etc. always come from Anders
> > Clausager at the BMIHT, at the time the book was originally written. I
>have
> > always found it wise not to second-guess whatever Anders tells me, because
> he
> > has all the statistics and records there at Gaydon. I don't know who Joe
> is,
> > but if his source is the BMIHT and so is mine, how can the figures possibly
> > 'differ greatly' from those I quote? And does 'greatly' mean 20 in 300,000
> or
> > 10,000 in 300,000? If we're going to have a war, let's get down to
> > specifics... "I'd question the source of the person who wrote that..."
> > Bloody cheek. I'd be very chary about writing that about an American
> writing
> > about American cars, so why does he do it in the other direction?
> > The only thing I would say is that even Anders occasionally
> massages/marginally
> > alters his figures from time to time. Accordingly, those I quote in my MRP
> > Collectors Guide for Spitfires/GT6s are slightly different from those
> > published in my Osprey book and from my MRP book, merely because one book
> came
> > along years later. I rechecked (that's right, rechecked) everything and
> used
> > Anders' latest 'sworn on a bible' facts and figures. As you can see, I
> don't
> > like my integrity being rubbished - and you are welcome to use the whole of
> > this to quote back at the obviously saintly 'Joe'. If he wants to contact
> me
> > by e-mail, I am on: grahamrobson@compuserve.com.
> >
> > Graham Robson
> >
> > I guess you touched a few nerves there! In any case, if you haven't seen it
> I
> > believe you have a right to. I guess the rest of the list would be
> fascinated
> > to see what transpires - for some reason I seem unable to send e-mails to
> the
> > list, although I can e-mail individuals, so if you are happy to share this
> > around please forward it to the list.
> >
> > I am taking no sides here, I'm just copying out a letter from a magazine, so
> > please no-one have a go at me over this! Don't shoot the messenger!!
> >
> > Richard Gosling and Daffy
|