--PART.BOUNDARY.0.595.emout09.mail.aol.com.852223777
Content-ID: <0_595_852223778@emout09.mail.aol.com.84204>
Just thought everybody should see what was going on over on the MG NET
Chet
TR-6 MGB 72's
--PART.BOUNDARY.0.595.emout09.mail.aol.com.852223777
Content-ID: <0_595_852223778@emout09.mail.aol.com.84205>
name="MGSRE.TXT"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=0D
------------------------------
=0D
Date: Wed, 01 Jan 1997 22:08:20 -0500
From: "Michael P. Ohleger" <mikeoh@bellatlantic.net>
Subject: Re: MG vs. Triumph
=0D
David Deutsch wrote:
> =
> This is a non issue. As I've said before the only thing Triumphs are
> good for is to come to All British Show and make our MG look so much
> nicer. To try some kind of comparison is rediculous. There is no
> contest MGs and MG people are the absolute best, most passionate auto
> enthusiasts on earth. We constitute a microcosism of the ideal
> community. If the whole world could work together as well as MG owners
> do we would live in a Utopia. Sounds wonderful, but just as you close
> your eyes to imagine, along comes a Triumph and reality kicks back in.
> As for you people of duel ownership, triumph/MG, there are some doctors=
> with real comfy couches that can help you with this identity crisis. ;)=
> :-) Having some fun now, Safety Fast, David Deutsch
=0D
I agree with David, this is a non-issue (leave it to adolescence to attem=
pt
controversy), but I also think that Triumph people do have their heads in=
the
clouds (as well as places that the sun don't shine). Case in point: TRF'=
s
Christmas catalogue. Where was the MG stuff??!? Charles Runyon owns a
parking lot full of TRs, do you think he has an attitude? Or maybe he was=
overstocked with a lot of TR parts that he needed to unload.
=0D
Triumphs or MGs, you gotta love the lbc's. I still think the MG people a=
re
a friendlier lot.
=0D
Cheers, :->
=0D
Michael Ohleger
=0D
'67 MGB
'70 MGB
=0D
------------------------------
=0D
--PART.BOUNDARY.0.595.emout09.mail.aol.com.852223777--
|