I'll get into this thread too,
As one of the younger members of the list I look at things somewhat
different that the guys that were around when the MGs were new (I was born
in 81).
I feel that in 15-20 years the supply of MG parts for our cars will be
exhaused. By then the MG RV8 and the MGF will be for the younger MG
enthusiasts. Kids that are 7-8 now will happily take a MGF or RV8, just
because their daddy or mommy had an MG when they were kids. They won't
care if they are "real MGs" they will just want an MG, they will be doing
what we are doing now: preserving a hobby. And as long as the MG name
lives that is fine with me, I really do not care who owns the MG name or
even if it isn't a British Car Company that produces the MG. But all I
know is that the next generation of MG enthusiasts now has MGs from there
time that they can buy and restore when they grow up. Maybe Rover, will
open its eyes and bring the MGF to the US.
I really don't like the MG RV8, but the first time I saw it I thought it
was cool, then I saw the MGF and thought it was cool. Well, then I got a
MGB and then it all changed I now reallize that the new MGs are not as
MGish as the earlier MGs. They are lacking something, but this is my
opinion. Young kids now don't know this and they won't know it when they
get their MGFs or RV8s. So, don't spoil it for them by telling them they
suck and taking pictures of MGFs and RV8s off the WWW and then converting
them into bitmap images and draw all over them in Paintbrush. I have done
this and now my 5 year old sister swears she will never buy an MG because
"they are ugly" (I also took the Paintbrush eraser and erased parts of the
car and then told her that is because they rust too much). But if my
sister never owns an MG that is fine with me because it will be one more MG
that I or anyone else can buy. So, lets leave the MGFs and the RV8s for
the little kids.
Kai M. Radicke -- mowogmg@dynanet.com
1966 MGB -- http://www.dynanet.com/~mowogmg
----------
> From: The Richards <smrm@coastalnet.com>
> To: mgs@autox.team.net
> Subject: Real MGs
> Date: Saturday, November 09, 1996 7:27 AM
>
> Seems the world has been running out of 'real' MGs since the introduction
of
> the T series, with each new model being labeled by some as 'not a real
MG'.
> . . right up to the rubber bumper Bs (I certainly think they're 'real'
MGs,
> just ugly ones). The MGF would seem to have at least some continuity of
> design, since Gerry McGovern, its chief designer, worked on the EX-E way
> back in 1985 and some MG people were evidently on that design team. Also,
> Don Hayter(who designed the B) says that the B replacement MG was trying
to
> push through Leyland was a mid-egined vehicle.
> Besides, MGs have never been snobby, blue-blood cars. I compare them
to
> border collies -- bred for a purpose with a nobility of spirit that
> surpasses any pedigree.
> I think the F is a 'real' MG -- though I wish Rover had adopted new
> nomenclature to acknowledge the gap from the B to the F. Perhaps using an
R
> for rover( as in the RV8). MG-RF? Or MG-R1.8. Or?
>
> Michael, New Bern, NC
>
|