Dave "I don't get no respect either" Williamson writes:
>This supports a long-held theory that I have, namely that TR's are
>seen as collectors' cars, while Spitfires are looked on by the general
>public to be more "disposable".
>Is the Spitfire the Rodney Dangerfield of Triumphs?
Yes, but most owners don't really care. Maybe Spitfire owners are like
Rodney Dangerfield in "Caddyshack". Stumbling through life, stepping
on peoples' toes, oblivious of their lack of etiquette. Hopefully we
are better looking than Rodney (at least I have more hair).
I enjoyed driving my car when it was running and will enjoy it after it
is restored. It was a cheaply made car, underpowered (US version),
lots were made. Doesn't do much for car collectors but who cares? I
am an owner, not a collector. An advantage is that parts are
relatively plentiful and inexpensive.
TeriAnn put it nicely:
>You don't restore a car to sell it, you do it to fall in love with
>driving it all over again.
A car's worth is in the eyes of the owner and my car is priceless for
the memories I made in it and will make when it is restored.
Regards,
Pat Willems
'72 Spit Mk IV (in pieces)
p-willems@ti.com
|