dresden@star.net wrote:
> I'm sure that the original LBC's were meant to be new
> and exciting roadsters, honoring but not bound by
> tradition, and not copycat cars.
A noble and pleasant thought. But knowing the way the
world works, I wouldn't buy it.
The only thing wrong the Miata lies in people's heads. This
discussion is always beaten to death, but everyone is like
"They copied this" and "they cloned that".
How many Triumphs would be the way they are if it
wasn't for Lotus, Jaguar, MG, and so on?
Nothing grows from a vacuum. The Miata just stands
out because it has no contemporaries. If every company
made a roadster, the Miata wouldn't get such a hard time
about not being an LBC.
> is vaguely offensive is the BRG and beige models; it is the British cars
> and their own character that made that color scheme great; why can't
> Mazda, if the Miata is to be at all its own car, fly their own colors?
I don't think this argument carries water. I would buy a nice
70's BRG Spitfire or TR6, both are cars that have no greater claim
to fame to the colour than the Miata. The colour was ancient
when all of them were made. Being painted in the same country
as some great "cars of olde" doesn't count for much.
In thirty years, everyone will complain that some new
roadster "is a ripoff of the Miata". It goes around.
--
Trevor Boicey
Ottawa, Canada
tboicey@brit.ca
http://www.brit.ca/~tboicey/
|