Well, there is a certain feel to a British car vs Italian vs Japanese vs
American vs German. For instance, I don't care that Z3s are made in South
Carolina, they are still teutonic. And the Acuras made in Tennessee are
still Japanese. There is just a 'feel' that makes it so for me. The new
Jags are all British, but (flame shields up), the MGF does not make the
cut, even though it was designed and built in GB. Thus, it breaks the
'country of origin the longest' rule. It's more Japanese looking (don't
know about feel, I have not driven one). A Morgan could be built on Mars
and it'd still be British. No logic or even clear thinking here - that goes
out the door the day your spridget becomes your daily driver :) Actually,
so does your hearing.
Jeff
At 9:53 AM -0400 6/9/99, Wiedemeyer wrote:
> >Hmmmm....... how do you define a British car? Is a new Jaguar British just
> >because it is built in Britain, even though it is owned by a
> (predominantly)
> >American company? If Mazda opened a factory in Britain and started turning
> >out Miatas, would they be British? If the Morgan family sold their business
> >to me, and I moved production to Canada, would the cars I built be British?
> >
> >This whole economic globalization thing really does blur our concepts.
>
>
> It seems to me that one thing determines what "nationality" a car is:
> Country of origin of longest (if more than one) owner of the company.
>
> Bob
Jeff Boatright '65 Sprite MkIII __o_\__
http://userwww.service.emory.edu/~jboatri/
|