[Top] [All Lists]

RE: New MG Sports Car to be unvailed next week

To: "'Telewest \(PH\)'" <>,
Subject: RE: New MG Sports Car to be unvailed next week
From: "Lew Palmer" <>
Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2002 12:15:40 -0500
Now what constitutes a "real" MG?

Remember, in 1936 when Morris took over the design office for MG, the
overhead cam MMM cars were supplanted with the T-series and the SVW
range, enthusiasts bemoaned the fact that the new cars weren't "real"

In 1950, the TD was introduced with steel wheels and no wire wheel
option and were declared "not real MGs".

In 1953, the then BMC was formed from MG and others, the TF was
introduced and enthusiasts declared they weren't "real MGs".

Again, in 1956, with the introduction of the MGA, without the upright
"square-rigger" shape, - "not real MGs".

In 1981, with the introduction of the front-wheel drive Metro, Maestro,
and Montego, all Austin sedan badge engineered cars - not "real" MGs.

...and on and on...

Well you catch my drift.

Lew Palmer

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [] On
> Of Telewest (PH)
> Sent: Friday, October 18, 2002 3:31 AM
> To: Rick Brown; mglist
> Subject: Re: New MG Sports Car to be unvailed next week
> >From what I have read some of the design issues that led to its very
> mixed
> reception when announced some time ago were caused by having to retain
> sufficient Mangusta engineering to keep its accreditation for the USA.
> presumably 'Yes'.
> But it's not a *real* MG ...

///  or try
///  Archives at

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>