Gee Dave, I'm sorry I didn't check with you first before I got my MG. I
can't believe your acerbic comments are representative of the MG community
at large. Some of us may not have the knowledge, capability, or time to
keep our MGs in top shape, much as we would like to. I don't believe that
should exclude me from MG ownership. Anyway, it doesn't matter - this is a
wide world, of which MGs are but a small part of it.
Of course, your statement that MGs are more reliable than modern cars is
just that - your statement. I anticipated that kind of comment in my
previous post (see 'anecdotal evidence'). We all have our personal
prejudices - both of ours perhaps are showing.
Jim 'Is this called flaming?' Mellander
At 02:30 PM 1/12/97 -0800, you wrote:
>Hello Jim,
>Jim,
>Reliablity is very important and apparently you are not reliable. If
>you were you would not have allowed your MGB to be put in the position
>of having to brake down due to your neglect.
>These are not magic carpets. In fact treated properly they are more
>reliable than any new automobile being manufactured today.
>It was Henry Ford who said "if it's not there, it can't fail". The
>message being, keep it simple. Well it does not get much simpler than a
>MG. I am not trying to talk you out of selling that B of yours, quite
>the contrary, you are not worthy of MG ownership. My only wish is you
>sell to someone who will appreciate the car enough to correctly
>maintain it and in return the MGB will give back a feeling of pleasure
>and pride of it's ownership that no price tag could ever be attached
>to.
>Best of luck to you, Marilynne, your dogs and those pitiful examples
>of automotive technology to remain in your driveway, once the only
>thing worth keeping is gone.
>David Deutsch
>
>Jim Mellander wrote:
>>At the risk of starting a flame-war, there is something to be said for
>>reliable transportation. While it is true that the rice burners don't
>have
>>the soul of the MG, they require much less maintenance. I'm sure some
>of
>>you will disagree & will present anecdotal evidence, but the
>perception that
>>LBCs are unreliable didn't come out of thin air. Too many people that
>I
>>know or have heard about have been stranded by Brit cars, to just
>dismiss
>>the problem. Truly, LBCs are a labor of love & I dearly love my MGB,
>but
>>don't have the time to devote to it that it needs. MG's will always
>have a
>>place in my heart.
>>
>>So go ahead, flame if you must...
>>
>>
>>Jim
>>
>>
>You wrote:
>>
>>At 04:16 PM 1/11/97 -0800, you wrote:
>>>UN-B-LIEVABLE, Jim seems to be having a "Warped Priorities Disorder".
>>>This usually occurs when 1/2 of a couple allows the other 1/2 to suck
>>>the fun out of their life.
>>>David Deutsch
>>>The keepers:
>>>58 Austin wagon
>>>66 B
>>>66 Midget
>>>75 B
>>>79 B
>>>The soon available
>>>76 B
>>>67 Sprite
>>>
>>>You wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Jim & Marilynne Mellander wrote:
>>>>> 79 B - going away, sob, sob.
>>>>> 89 Olds Cutlass Supreme
>>>>> 86 Honda Accord
>>>>> 88 Honda Accord
>>>>> 84 Toyota Truck
>>>>> 61 VW Bug - doggie transportation.
>>>>
>>>>Two Hondas and a Toyota, and the 'B' goes. Sigh.
>>>>
>>>>Bob Allen, Kansas City, '69CGT, '75TR6
>>>>--
>>>>*** STANDARD DISCLAIMER
>>>>*** Please assume all lines end with smiley face emoticon :-)
>>>>*** unless passage contains improbable anatomical action phrases
>>>>*** in which case the raspberry emoticon can be implied ;^P***
>>>
>
>>
>
>
>
|