Phil Ethier wrote:
>
> From: Joe Curry <spitlist@gte.net>
>
> >Some of that might have to do with the fact that the TR7 wasn't designed to
> >be a convertible. Surprising considering the country of origin, but not
> >surprising at a time when it was believed proposed US rollover standards
> >would effectively ban convertibles.
>
> I never did understand that. The factory could sidestep such standards
> easily with a factory roll bar.
>
> Roadster buyers would gladly accept such a move, as the car looks racier.
> Jeep didn't have any probloems selling their vehicles because of the roll
> bars.
It's possible that roll bars gained some converts among the suburban
Jeep crowd after _Jeep's_ little to-do about rollover hazards (remember
that one from the mid-`80s?). There is also, perhaps, the notion on the
part of buyers, even those who would never go further into the woods
than an unpaved shoulder, that such an item enhances the Jeep's off-road
reputation.
The opposite psychology may have been at work with sports cars and
convertibles. The manufacturers, likely wrongly, may see such a factory
item as suggesting to buyers that the car is not safe, and has rollover
tendencies. True, to those of us who recognize the value of them, it
doesn't make much sense, admittedly.
Cheers.
--
Michael D. Porter
Roswell, NM
[mailto: mporter@zianet.com]
`70 GT6+ (being refurbished, slowly)
`71 GT6 Mk. III (organ donor)
`72 GT6 Mk. III (daily driver)
`64 TR4 (awaiting intensive care)
`80 TR7 (3.8 liter Buick-powered)
|