On Sun, 21 Dec 1997, John McEwen wrote:
> Hi Andrew:
>
> Did you ever think that you may have created a whole new category - LOS,
> Length of Suffering. What's even more significant is that this is SOL
> backwards. Does that sum us up?
Very nicely, yes.
> I think that the LOS annual award should be instituted for the SOLer who
> has shown the greatest LOS based on the difference between his/her age at
> purchase and the age of the LBC, plus the length of time he has owned the
> vehicle. An appropriate formula might be:
>
> Chronological Age (CA) minus Vehicle Age (VA) plus Years Owned (YO) = LOS
>
> Therefore: CA - VA + YO = LOS
Goodness knows I'm no mathematician, but how about reversing the formula
somewhat, i.e. subtracting the owner's age at time of purchase from the
age of the car at time of purchase. Otherwise, the formula could actually
penalize those of us who own cars older than ourselves. Case in point:
Priscilla, the mighty 1952 Triumph Mayflower, is about one year OLDER than
I. And I'll wager that similar situations might well exist amongst the
ranks of sidescreen TR owners on the list and even some of you crazy
young whippersnappers with your Spitfires. ;-)
> I am quite sure that this will generate a completely meaningless number but
> whoever gets the biggest one will win the "Smokefree Lucas Component
> Award".
Also, how will one factor in multiple car ownership -- those of us with,
say, four or more (or twelve or more) Triumphs? Do we take an average,
calculated LOS number or must we choose one and only one car on which to
base our final figure? Or do those of us with more than one Triumph
automatically get placed in a special category?
--Andy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* Andrew Mace, President and *
* 10/Herald/Vitesse (Sports 6) Consultant *
* Vintage Triumph Register *
* amace@unix2.nysed.gov *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
|