« Previous Entry | MAIN | Next Entry »
December 03, 2003
Hi guys
I recently bought the January 2004 issue of the British Classic Car Magazin
=3D=0D
e
'Practical Classics' which is usually very good. I've been reading this
magazine for about 20 years.
However, I must say that I'm not at all happy with the article on pages 152
=3D=0D
-153
of said magazine titled 'Our Top Ten Misunderstood Classic Cars', where the
=3D=0D
Austin Healey Frogeye Sprite accompanies such memorable classics as the
Triumph Acclaim, Ford Pop 103E, Reliant Regal, Fiat 124 and Daf 44/45 among
=3D=0D
st
others.
The text under the picture of the Frogeye reads as follows -
Another bit of a confidence trick, though not entirely intentional. The Spr
=3D=0D
ite
was developed as an ultra-cheap sports car, and over three years nearly
50,000 were sold. It was rude, crude and none too fast - hardly surprising
=3D=0D
given that most of the mechanical bits were nicked from the rip-snorting A3
=3D=0D
5.
The problem today is that the styling has become accidentaly cool, the
smiling grille and bulging headlights giving it a cheeky-chappie image; in
=3D=0D
reality Austin simply lacked the money to develop proper pop-up lights. And
=3D=0D
that has pushed up prices for the best ones as high as =A38,000, with resto
ra=3D=0D
tion
projects even approaching two grand. A lot of money for so little car.
For: Feels faster than it is
Against: Which is just as well
I suggest anyone who feels strongly enough about this 'stupid, naive' artic
=3D=0D
le
clearly written by a journalist who has been stuffing too much white powder
=3D=0D
up his nose, emails the magazine politely pointing out the error of their w
=3D=0D
ays,
I'm sure they would be glad of the feedback.
editorial email: practical.classics (at) emap.com
Nigel
"amukdigiphoto" < amukdigiphoto@... > 27222
Posted on December 3, 2003 10:25 PM
Posted to category(s) Body | Exterior | International | Miscellaneous
