"Bowen, Patrick" wrote:
>
> Bob, try again. Triumph Motorcycles and Triumph Cars have nothing to do
> with each other. The Triumph Motor Company sold of their motorcycle branch
> in the 30s? to fund new developments. Since then they ahve been two
> completely separate entities, having nothing to do with the other.
Hehehe... on the topic of "try again", that's a fair
bit revisionist as well.
It could be argued that neither the Triumph car company
or the Triumph Motorcycle company have any real tangible
link to the pre-war company called Triumph.
Around wartime, Triumph found itself with in dire straits
with no upcoming products, no materials, no funds, and so on
and effectively folder.
About all it had was some public good will in the name,
both in motorcycles and in cars.
One group thought it could use the name to continue to
build motorcycles, and another group felt the name could
be used to sell cars.
So the "name" was split and sold to two different entities,
and the two Triumphs were born.
The pre-war Triumph and post-war Triumphs have remarkably
little in common except the name.
...relating to the current situation, if BMW were to
come back with a "Triumph" to go against the Miata, it
wouldn't be the first time. ;>
--
Trevor Boicey, P. Eng.
Ottawa, Canada, tboicey@brit.ca
ICQ #17432933 http://www.brit.ca/~tboicey/
"Hail to thee, oh wide screen TV..." - Johnny Bravo
|