On Wed, 10 Feb 1999 GuyotLeonF@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 10/02/99 12:51:25 GMT, you write:
> <<<I don't watch the Simpson's, I prefer to spend my time on more constructive
> things>>>
>
All work and no play makes jack a dull boy! I would hate to think
however that the common perception is that I watch TV all day!
>
> <<<Perhaps Johnny, just perhaps, you might be adult enough to consider that
> your's might not be the only opinion ?
of course I am aware there is another opinion, I'm not all that keen on
it!
>>And as for your language!>>>
Well, you can blame 'Gone with the Wind' for that!
<<nb.Terry Hurrell is no the owner of 'Triumph Tune' any longer, just a
> manager who works for Moss Europe, which isn't even part of Moss proper any
> longer.>>>
Whatever Terry Hurrels position is doesn't matter, whether he is
Director or Telesales. If he admits he will sell crappy parts coz we'll
buy them then I'm not happy with that!
> What they do with their spare time is their own issue! The only
> enthusiasts i don't want much to do with are those who don't drive their
> cars and think they have some kind of Aston Zagato when it's not.
>
> <<<Isn't that their own issue too ?, You can't have it both ways you know!>>>
When that attitude begins to price me out of the market then I'm
concerned! I'm beginning to notice a lack of daily-drivers and an
increase of restoration projects. The two appear to inhabit the same
price range!
> Surely it is better for Joe Public to have a positive view of our type of cars
> than just follow the government/new car manufacturers/environmental lobby's
> line that they are all dirty, smoky, slow old heaps that should not be allowed
> out on the road.
Instead surely it is better for them to see our cars as regular, viable
daily transport rather than weekend showpieces? Who cares how much fuel
costs are if you assume the owner is only going to drive irregularly?
Councors gives the impression that old cars are a liablility and are
only safe for use once a month if the weathers nice!
>
> <<<As to the value of the GT6 that Bill appeared with, I am afraid that I have
> not seen that article, so don't know which car you are referring to, but the
> maximum value of the very best GT6's is no more than 15,000 GBP. I suspect
> that the price was 'adjusted' by the usually truthful members of the press, as
> if they would exaggerate ??? Surely not...However, the number of GT6's
> continues to decrease through attrition, decomposition or just parting-
A journalist, whatever his level has to start with a base fact
somewhere!
> <<<Then you go on to say that the TSSC is all about making triumphs so
> valuable no 'normal' person can afford one.>>>
>
> <<<Stuff and Nonsense, TSSC doesn't dictate prices, the market place does
> that, and the owners who are prepared to spend their hard earned money on
> restoring/improving them...unless of course you are of the opinion that we
> should just run them all into the ground, then buy a Miata or similar ?>>>
The TSSC publishes the prices for cars. I am in no way saying all
triumphs should be run into the ground. I am saying they should be used!
>
> <<<If you find Rich 'attractive', then he'd better watch out!,
Theres nowt wrong with Rich, he's a fine figure of a man!
>
> Also the TSSC continue on about their owning the oldest Herald, i think
> we know that they don't.
>
> <<<So, find an older one, and we will consider buying it!>>>
Look out! It's the money thing again! I didn't say that The TSSC must
own the oldest herald, just that seeing as it doesn't it should stop
saying it does!
>
> <<<I'm not sure how much of the car under restoration is original, but have
> you ever heard of the Axe that chopped down a certain tree ? All original
> except for two replacement heads and three replacement handles ?
I am familiar with that analogy but i prefer triiger's broom from 'only
fools and horses'!
> Again, it's just your opinion verses that of others, should only totally
> original unused factory-built cars be restored because you say so ? In my
> opinion, a Lenham car has an interesting part to play in Triumph history, they
> were sold contemporarily with new original Triumph Spitfires, and besides
> Triumph enthusiasts have been modifying their cars since the day they rolled
> out of the showrooms! Not just since TSSC was formed!>>>
I don't think that only 100% original cars should be restored. I think
people shouldn't be mislead into thinking 'this' was 'the' car! for all
we know it was a far later model that picked up a handy log book!
> <<<I wonder just for a moment, Johnny, how you would consider your own highly
> original Triumph "70 Viterald" ? Do you intend to run it into the ground ?
I intend to use my Viterald and repair it, and maintain it as required!
> Restore it, or sell it at a loss ? After all, it would never do would it, to
> spend any money on it, or restore it, or remove any non-original parts from
> it, or perhaps even have any pride in it, would it ???>>>
How do you know that I have no pride in my vehicle! I take great pride
in driving a car produced by a totally british owned company. I take
pride knowing it was designed in the UK and that spares etc are more
likely to be UK produced and provide employment in the UK. I am
perturbed however that UNIPART fan belts are made in denmark!
At the moment i appear to be spending too juch on it in order to keep it
on the road, but i will, whatever the cost! as for original parts, hmm!
My Viterald has been roadworthy for all of it's 29 year life so original
parts are at a premium! I'm assuming your comment means how can I
complain about the lenham when my own vehicle isn't 100% original? My
answer is that I'm not claiming to be driving an original 13/60,
everyone knows it has been adapted!
>
> <<<Ah yes, the GT6R, it was about 10 years ago now, Yes I did tell the TSSC,
> and nothing was done simply because the owner didn't want to sell it, that's
> why.
> Half a copy ? sorry you've lost me there, the Lenham car was not meant to be a
> copy of the GT6R, that was six inches wider, and had a six cylinder engine in
> it.
I'm well aware that the Lenham isn't a rep of GT6R, I was just showing
how a real car was left (for what ever reason, i will take your word the
owner was unforgiving) and a similar, yet less worthy vehicle was kept.
> I sincerely hope that my source wasn't lying to me, because, it was me!
> I went and looked at the car with my own eyes, examined it and took photos.>>>
I mentioned about a source not lying to give you the benifit of the
doubt. I appreciate the fate of GT6R was shrouded in mystery and lots of
people make great claims to some cars histories. By source I meant the
cars owner.
>
> <<<Hopefully, it won't be the TSSC, as you don't yet seem to comprehend the
> notion of clubbing together ? Actually, in the fullness of time you will come
> to learn that in fact it is not just about the cars, but about the people in
> the club, the members, and what we can do to help one another with our cars
> and connected difficulties.
you're right in that it won't be the TSSC. But you are wrong that i
don't understand the idea of clubbing together. I look forward to
meeting people I have through the triumph World at stoneleigh and other
events, or just visiting them for the hell of it!
>
> Sorry, but I'll have to miss out on Stoneleigh this year, for the first time.
> I have to be elsewhere.
> But have a good time and hope you pick up all the parts you need there.
I will hopefully have good time (as long as it doesn't rain) and will
probably do the same as I always do and be seduced by a set of wide
alloys!
tra for now, Johnny
|