From the Rumor Mill:

[Andrew Mace]

That's true; you're absolutely right! Guess I should have said only true Triumph motor that ended up being used in a production Triumph! There were some "big" Triumph saloon prototypes with longer engine bays to accommodate that OHC 6.

 

[sparkydave]

Now if they make it look like the TR4 in the picture, then that would be cool. To make it really seem like a LBC though they would have to have the optional loose fitting manually operated top, make power steering and power brakes optional, and just for yucks, have the dash lights occasionally flicker /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/lol.gif.

 

[MGA Steve]

[ QUOTE ]
Since it sounds as if they would be built off the Mini chasis I would only consider buying one if it is RWD not FWD. FWD would be way out of character for a TR.

[/ QUOTE ] Some "thinking out loud" here: All BMWs are RWD or AWD. BMW would not want to compete with the Z4 or spend the development money for a less-expensive, AWD sports car. So, when they came out with a FWD car, they called it a MINI.

The Z4 competes in price with the Honda S2000, Lotus Elise, Vauxhall VX220, Audi TT, etc. It does not compete in price with the Pontiac Solstice, Saturn Sky, MX-5, RX8, or even the new 350Z.

So, what about a cheaper sports car using the engine/tranaxle from the MINI? Ie., a "parts bin" two-seater, just like the Triumphs of old . . but with a MID-ENGINE. Maybe 2/3 the price of a Z4 and badged as a British marque because it is not front-engined, RWD, inline 6-cylinder car.

Works for me--I'd have to seriously consider one! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/thumbsup.gif

 

[Mickey Richaud]

[ QUOTE ]
A new TRIUMPH wouldn't be a Triumph to me... but it would continue the marque. Unfortunately I'll have to listen to a new round of "Hey, did you hear they're making those again?"

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, a new ANYTHING isn't a "real" anything, is it? Look at the Mustang, the Corvette, the Jaguar, etc., etc.

I guess the question might be: How important is it to keep the name alive? Because nothing is as it was - all marques have evolved and will continue to do so.

 

[dklawson]

Mickey... that's just it... it's only a name. Old and new Mustangs are indeed different but at least that's the result of the slow evolution of one model of car not a disjointed and totally unrelated vehicle. Look at the new and old Beetles. For a while you could buy a Mexican air cooled (old) or the German water cooled (new) at the same time. Hardly the same car... sharing only the name and a parent company. The new MINI and a new TRIUMPH wouldn't even share the same parentage. Some would argue that preliminary MINI development was carried on by British designers in the U.K. but the end product certainly has a lot of German in it. That's not necessarily a bad thing, just different.

 

[MadRiver]

I've always had mixed feelings. First, I have longed for an MGF for many years. It drove me crazy that MG -- when it was owned by Britons -- made a modern sports car, and I wasn't able to go to a dealer and purchase one. There was one in the DC area that was owned by an RAF attache at the British embassy. I'd see him dashing around, his cap at a jaunty angle. I also had a Miata for a while, and thought it was great fun to have a simple roadster with modern safety features, and also components that were generally younger than I was. More recently, I rented a Mini Cooper convertible a few months back. While it bothers the heck out of me that they're all Mini Coopers rather than just being Minis (the "S" should be the "Cooper"), I really enjoyed it.

On the flip side, I have to admit that one of the things that makes me addicted to my 250 is that it drives, handles, smells and sounds like an old car. A new car could never replicate that experience for me.

Of course, I'll be honest. If it's rear wheel drive, attractive and cheap, I'll buy one. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif