John:
This is why you write books, and I sell computer consulting. I meant
to say that Triumphs are excellent classic daily drivers AND that the
prize was meant to encourage that -- the use of Triumphs as daily
drivers, as you said. And that, given that they're relatively cheap,
good daily drivers, they're great choices for young drivers. I didn't
mean to connect the award with young drivers, though my poor
sentence structure surely did so. I'm sure I was misunderstood
for good reason, since I breezed through grammar class while
sketching the bulldozers at work on the new middle school wing.
And had I spent a bit more time sketching bulldozers I'd have put
my art degree to better use -- and I'd still have a useful skill in this
slower technology economy. <g> Doesn't look like I'll be writing
for a living, though.
Steven
> I (Steven Newell) wrote:
> But Triumph's are excellent cheap classic drivers and that makes them
> great choices for young old-car users. Which was the point of the
> Bloody Miracle memorial brick anyway.
>
> John Macartney wrote:
> Sorry, Steven - but it wasn't. The objective of the prize was for it
> to be given to a car that was proven by its appearance and a number of
> other criteria applied by VTR to be in running order, being used on a
> regular basis and giving pleasure to its owner....
and
> ...The prize exists to encourage Triumph owners who may
> feel intimidated by the presence of what they may see as 'superior'
> examples drawing the attention of judges at a concours. There's
> evidently plenty of scope and support for prizes to be awarded for
> cars in that concours or semi-concours category and the 'Bloody
> Miracle' prize bucks that trend. The age of the winner counts for
> nothing....
--
Steven Newell
Denver, CO
'62 TR4
/// triumphs@autox.team.net mailing list
/// To unsubscribe send a plain text message to majordomo@autox.team.net
/// with nothing in it but
///
/// unsubscribe triumphs
///
|