bill wrote:
>
> Jeff Stovall,
>
> The thread got started when someone posted of reading in the Electronic
> Times (London Times? online?) about BMW bringng back the Triumph name.
> [....] that evening a Mr. Bankie (sp?) of BMW anounced that the
> Triumph and Austin-Healey names would be back by the turn of the century.
>
> Someone posted they hope it wouldn't come back, I then posted over the
> holidays that I hoped it would.
Hello Bill--
This thread has appeared before, in various guises, and I find it
curious that so many folks seem opposed to the revival of the marque.
Admittedly, much of the opposition is centered around the notion that
the character of the revived cars would be drastically changed from that
of the cars we know because of foreign ownership of the marque. The
general revulsion for Miatas is an indication of that worry. <g>
However, Triumph failed (probably with generous help from
British-Leyland) because it eventually produced automobiles which did
not change with the demands of the market, and became known for
unreliability at a time when the public was coming to expect high
reliability (largely due to the engineering efforts of the Japanese and
the failures of domestic makers to that end).
All these factors get a little twisted when reviewed from the
perspective of enthusiasts who own cars from a bygone era (strange as
that phrase may seem to those who currently own and run cars made in
that time <g>). It is possible that BMW would simply revive the Triumph
name in order to produce a low-end clone of the BMW. It's equally
possible (and, in a marketing sense, probably necessary) that BMW will
lend engineering assistance to a core engineering group of remaining
available Triumph engineers and designers to carry on a tradition. If
the market for Triumphs of the future were to depend solely upon the
Triumph enthusiasts of today, it would probably fail again, because the
cars wouldn't leak oil, wouldn't break down almost daily, wouldn't creak
and groan when passing over tar strips in the road, wouldn't turn
middle-aged kidneys to mush on trips over ten miles.... <g> But, then,
market expectations of today demand more, and better.
In short, if BMW preserves the character of the cars, there will be a
whole new generation of Triumph enthusiasts. The character of the cars
was simple--they were (and are) fun and exciting to drive. Distill and
preserve that essence while upgrading to current technology and no one
is harmed. If the current crop of enthusiasts thinks that the
detractions of the previous cars adds to their charm, they will still
have the old versions of the marque to satisfy their desires. <g> I
wouldn't have objections to owning both old and new examples of the
marque.
One last thought on the subject--one need only look at Ford's influence
on the new Jaguar. The styling of that car resurrects the distinctive
features of the E-type, and yet, the technology is considerably
upgraded... and, assuming that the design is reasonably reliable, who
wouldn't want an engine with variable cam timing which produces a
minimum of 80% of maximum torque across the entire rpm range? That car
will likely be a bigger kick to drive than the original E-types, and
will turn just as many heads and stir as many female hearts as the
original on which it is based. <g> And yet, there will always be E-type
owners who will say, "piece of junk... just another Ford... fix or
repair daily" (as if the older Jags weren't in the same category).
<g>
Cheers.
--
My other Triumph doesn't run, either....
|