While I'm thinking about it, here a pic of the third Group 44 TR-6, Bill Warner's current car, in Newman's colors. It's almost the same angle as the above pic of Warner's TR-6.
I am currently collecting information for a Triumph Owner's Members Magazine in Germany. I am trying to find out some of the specs of the old Group44/Newman TR6. What tyre sizes, what seats, what steering wheel make, etc. Maybe you could help me out?
Furthermore, do you know Bill Warner personally? I would want to buy a negative of one of his shots.
I am currently collecting information for a Triumph Owner's Members Magazine in Germany. I am trying to find out some of the specs of the old Group44/Newman TR6. What tyre sizes, what seats, what steering wheel make, etc. Maybe you could help me out?
Furthermore, do you know Bill Warner personally? I would want to buy a negative of one of his shots.
Kind regards, Alex
Alex-
Yes, I do know Bill Warner personally, I work for him as a crew member on his ex-Group 44 Triumphs. He also is the founder of the annual Amelia Island Concours de' Elegance so he is very busy with that from January through mid-March. He should be much easier to contact now that the Concours is over for 2012.
....As for British Leyland... You couldn't plan failure better than they did.
Greenman62
Oh, I don't know...I look out my window at work everyday and see Kodak world headquarters, and I would say they've done a much more spectacular job of self destructing!
As for BL...I've owned several Triumphs, an MGB and a couple of Jags. All well designed and engineered cars, but the components (electrical and fuel systems) were just crap. Once you sorted out the fuel system with aftermarket parts and traced and properly hooked up the electrics, they ran quite reliably (except for the Jags, they were pre Ford ownership and were awful.)
Every time I see one of you guys doing a TR4/250 I get tempted to build one. I have several of the original MPC/Airfix European racing series kits still in cellophane just waiting to be put to use!
Oh, I don't know...I look out my window at work everyday and see Kodak world headquarters, and I would say they've done a much more spectacular job of self destructing!
I disagree... BL's issues were manifold. You had a management rooted in the old British class system conflicting with a better educated work force, not satisfied with the status quo. BL also was a company competing with itself for market share, they had poor dealer support which over the years never improved. Product issues aside there was plenty to doom the business.
OTOH, Kodak was a company which built its empire based on an analog-chemical process. When the process was made obsolete, Kodak tried but couldn't keep pace withe rapid changes going on in photography and its related businesses. I witnessed the downfall over the course of my career as a graphic designer.
When I graduated from art school in 1974 any reproduction for printed or visual media was done primarily photographically. There was a LOT of hand work involved in publishing, say a magazine. Once the articles were written and the photos were taken and submitted for publication. Type had to be set, photographically, pasted on the "mechanical" page up by hand to be photographed. Any "continuous tone" photography had to be converted to "line" for the printing press. This involved from one (for B&W) to 4 (for color) separate photos. These in turn were photographed to make negatives from which plates for the press were made. IMO the printing industry was the real basis for Kodak's survival, not family snapshots.
When digital photography appeared the "writing was on the wall". It was only a matter of time before all processes done the old way went digital. Today the process to "make a magazine" can be done entirely by a designer at a desktop computer... from start to finish without chemical photography at all. If a digital press does the reproduction no traditional photographic negatives, printing plates or inks are used either.
Kodak's downfall came because they couldn't reinvent a role for themselves in the new digital world. It's a bit like asking Ford to base their future survival on making cupcakes.
Greenman62
Last edited by greenman62; 04-09-2012 at 07:05 AM.
The company was not just competing with itself for market share, but was competing with itself for complete destruction of rivals. It even went back to before BL. Austin people hated Morris people, and killed off or delayed a number of possible "competitive" cars and engines. Later the Morris people would get the upper hand and kill off Austin Healey. Cars were successful DESPITE the machinations of management. The post bugeye Sprite/Midget was redesigned by two different teams who wern't supposed to talk to one another. While all this is going on, the company's wonder designer is trying to push away from sports cars and competion, in spite of competition being a large part of his success. THEN comes the BL MERGER. THAT would be like merging, say The Pennsylvania RR and the New York Central system.. Oh wait.. that was a royal mess too.
So the BL merger completes and the Triumph guys get control of their rivals, Rover, the luxury arm gets ahold of one of two engines in the family recognized as an internationally competitive powerplant while golden boy gets ahold of the family sedans. That ends up giving us the Triumph TR7, the Rover 3500 and the Austin Marina.
Its also the team that did all it could to try and either outright kill or neglect to death the successful and iconic models in their lineup. (Mini, Midget, Spitfire, MGB, TR6, XKE)
And for the record, I am a biased MG guy and include in my collection the "abomination" MG Midget 1500.
And on top of that was government "assistance". When cars came to Canada, for example, the importer didn't have to send the cheque for 18 months! the British gov't carried the receivables. BL, etc. was happy because they got paid immediately and the importer was happy because he sat on customers' cash for over a year. I believe that such market manipulation didn't really drive these firms to compete with designing and building quality products.
Linear Mode
