triumphs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Judging "New" Triumphs, was Trailer Queens

To: DLMAssoc@aol.com
Subject: Re: Judging "New" Triumphs, was Trailer Queens
From: "Brad Kahler" <brad.kahler@141.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1998 21:03:39 -0600
Cc: triumphs@Autox.Team.Net
> Actually, when I originally brought up the subject of "new" Triumphs, I
> was trying to get some opinions on judging cars that were built using a
> completely new body and other parts (is a new TR6 frame available yet?). 
> If I build a "reproduction" TR6, which I then drive around a lot and then
> enter a show, is it reasonable to judge it in the same class are "real"
> TR6s?  

Don, thats a tough question to answer.  I like to see that the stuff is 
available but if we start telling people those aren't really "true" triumphs 
then in the long run we're only hurting ourselves.  By the same token its 
definitely more work to "restore" one using NOS parts only to repair the 
bent and rusty tubs and sheetmetal, and its to the point where you can't 
really get NOS any more.  Like it or not, there will be more and more of these 
newly made old Triumphs running around.  

I guess I for one wouldn't want them to be judged any differently.  On the 
principal that if "it looks like triumph and drives like a triumph" then it 
probably is one.

Just my $0.02


Brad  (Lincoln Nebraska 402-464-1502)
My 1st attempt at a web site. Http://www.141.com/triumphs

1964  Spitfire4            BFC25720L
1962 TR4                   CT288L (To Maine or bust)
1959 TR3A                  TS41311L (someday)
1951 Dodge Truck    82217766  B-3-B-108 

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