Carryfast:
Which part of,reset the clock back to 1972,or we die as both an independent sovereign country and economically crushed by the weight of the combination of life blood sucking EU ‘contributions’ and an unsustainable trade deficit,didn’t you understand.
All of it, because it is errant nonsense.
Obviously to any Federalist liar trying to pretend that the EU is a Confederation of Sovereign States and our net contribution is a net benefit and our net trade deficit is a net trade surplus.Followed by the biggest lie of all that we can continue with that status quo infinitum without eventually ending up like Greece and being totally dominated by German elites with a bit of help from their quisling poodles like Macron.
On that note no BoJo and Farage aren’t the answer.Hoey and Batten just might have been.
Carryfast:
How is a large Zodiac 2.6 6 cylinder 4 door saloon capable of 100 mph and 0-60 in 13 seconds in any way shape or form ‘comparative’ with a small 1.5 litre mickey mouse German heap which struggled to reach 80 mph ?.
So staying with 1960’s prices,forget the 50’s,exactly how much ‘import duty’ are you suggesting was supposedly added to the Kraut heap to make it almost ‘twice’ the price of the ‘ZODIAC’ before and after purchase tax ?.While your comments just tell me that your buying choice was that an old obsolete piece of small German junk was better than buying a later,cheaper to maintain,faster,6 cylinder Triumph,with more room and more comfort,for around the same price if not less for example. (quote)
To answer your first question, if you rewind a little you’ll see that I was comparing the performance of my Borgward against other contemporary cars in the 1500cc class. It is YOU that brought up the later, larger, Zodiac, so your point is irrelevant.
I don’t know the rate of import duty applied at the time, but I can tell you that the Mk3 Zodiac (the 100 mph one) wasn’t available at the time that the Isabella was in production, but that the Mk2 Zodiac (the 90 mph one which was) cost a total of £957.7.6 against £1176.19.2, so where do you get the idea that the Borgward cost “almost twice as much”?
Your opinion of my buying choice, however, is not far from being right. I bought it because at the time, 1972 and 17 years old, I had only recently passed my test and wanted a cheap runabout. It had to be “unusual” and practical, and it ticked all my boxes. In the 2 years that I had it, it cost virtually nothing to run other than fuel, oil and filters and a set of spark plugs and a bulb or two. Most of the British cars for sale in the same price range as my Borgward in the budget-priced car lots back then were already starting to suffer seriously from corrosion and/or tired engines, so I left them alone. The “German Junk” turned out to be a good choice for me at the time, and turned a modest profit when I sold it on.
Carryfast:
So we replace German imports with domestic production putting us back in the position that we were in 1972.On the basis that the home produced product has no trade tariffs/barriers applied.
Em . . . domestic production?
Which part of,reset the clock back to 1972,or we die as both an independent sovereign country and economically crushed by the weight of the combination of life blood sucking EU ‘contributions’ and an unsustainable trade deficit,didn’t you understand.
All of it to be honest.
How long is it going to take to build a domestic manufacturing base and train a domestic workforce to create output to the levels of 1972? You really are that mad professor from Back To The Future, aren’t you?
Carryfast:
How is a large Zodiac 2.6 6 cylinder 4 door saloon capable of 100 mph and 0-60 in 13 seconds in any way shape or form ‘comparative’ with a small 1.5 litre mickey mouse German heap which struggled to reach 80 mph ?.
So staying with 1960’s prices,forget the 50’s,exactly how much ‘import duty’ are you suggesting was supposedly added to the Kraut heap to make it almost ‘twice’ the price of the ‘ZODIAC’ before and after purchase tax ?.While your comments just tell me that your buying choice was that an old obsolete piece of small German junk was better than buying a later,cheaper to maintain,faster,6 cylinder Triumph,with more room and more comfort,for around the same price if not less for example. (quote)
To answer your first question, if you rewind a little you’ll see that I was comparing the performance of my Borgward against other contemporary cars in the 1500cc class. It is YOU that brought up the later, larger, Zodiac, so your point is irrelevant.
I don’t know the rate of import duty applied at the time, but I can tell you that the Mk3 Zodiac (the 100 mph one) wasn’t available at the time that the Isabella was in production, but that the Mk2 Zodiac (the 90 mph one which was) cost a total of £957.7.6 against £1176.19.2, so where do you get the idea that the Borgward cost “almost twice as much”?
Your opinion of my buying choice, however, is not far from being right. I bought it because at the time, 1972 and 17 years old, I had only recently passed my test and wanted a cheap runabout. It had to be “unusual” and practical, and it ticked all my boxes. In the 2 years that I had it, it cost virtually nothing to run other than fuel, oil and filters and a set of spark plugs and a bulb or two. Most of the British cars for sale in the same price range as my Borgward in the budget-priced car lots back then were already starting to suffer seriously from corrosion and/or tired engines, so I left them alone. The “German Junk” turned out to be a good choice for me at the time, and turned a modest profit when I sold it on.
Did you read the real world list prices that I posted from Autocar in the day.More than £1,900 for an Isabella Coupe,let alone a Combi,in 1960 compared to £1070 for a Zodiac Mk 111 in 1962.Which is inconsistent with my claims of Brit value for money,made by what could only be efficient workers,v over priced German junk,how ?.While going by those figures yours seem a bit if not way off.
So your ‘cheap runabout’ could only have come at the expense of it’s previous mug owners taking a massive hit in depreciation.Which was similar to the situation of my BMW 3.0 Si which went from around £5,000 new to the £1,100 I paid for the thing 6 years later.However it’s maintenance costs soon showed why.
As for my first car a Triumph 2.5 PI that still would only have cost its first owner less than £1,600 new in 1971 let alone almost 2 grand in 1960 and I paid £ 550 for it in late 1976 and that provided me with around 4 years long commute and pleasure motoring for minimum outlay especially after I ditched its injection system for carbs and a much nicer driving experience than a 4 cylinder buzz bomb and with a civilised if not luxurious space for passengers.In 1972 you could have bought an even quicker Mk1 version for less than that being only £1,450 new.
Remind us again how much your poverty spec German heap’s first owner paid for it and how much you paid for it.At the end of the day you ending up with a small,cramped,gutless 1.5 engined, obsolete,1950’s heap and its first owner/s ending up with a massive depreciation headache.Compared to a proper Brit 6 cylinder motor in which everyone was a winner.While if you really want to compare a 1.5 engined Brit with the German competition of its day might as well go for the Mk1 Cortina.That’ll work.Militant workers turning out useless cars indeed.
As for the rate of import duty you can’t possibly provide any figure which could account for such a difference in value for money between Brit v German.As shown by the Rover 3500 v Merc 350 comparison.On that note there’s no reason why even the Stag couldn’t have been fitted with a 4.5 litre version of the Rover V8 at less than £2500 new.Oh wait the Germans would obviously then have gone running to their US and UK government stooges when the result blew their more than £8,000 450 SL out of the water like the Bismark if BL had dared to do it.All within the single market by that time so no bs import duty excuses.
If I am correct CF you were a participant in Building the British Junk we were taught were world-beating until we discovered otherwise.
My first Merc was a 1418 K reg, not a world beater but as an OD on Middle East bulletproof- day in day out never ever a problem - after 18 months earn’t me enough to get a LHD 15litre 320bhp V10 (M Reg) absolute bliss to drive and live in.
Nowadays I have a 1998 Merc C230 Kompressor - again just goes On & On - though This year I did have to put a new track rod end for the MOT, first repair job in 5years
whisperingsmith:
If I am correct CF you were a participant in Building the British Junk we were taught were world-beating until we discovered otherwise.
My first Merc was a 1418 K reg, not a world beater but as an OD on Middle East bulletproof- day in day out never ever a problem - after 18 months earn’t me enough to get a LHD 15litre 320bhp V10 (M Reg) absolute bliss to drive and live in.
Nowadays I have a 1998 Merc C230 Kompressor - again just goes On & On - though This year I did have to put a new track rod end for the MOT, first repair job in 5years
If you mean fwd BMC crap no.
As I said I worked within the specialist vehicle sector and we definitely made a more competitive product than the German competition,at the price,sold in numerous markets around the world from the US to Eastern Europe and Asia.
As for Mercs I’m obviously not saying that they’re not a class act.The point is this country could do something more or less as good for far less outlay and with far less investment.While something tells me that a track rod end since 1998 obviously isn’t exactly the whole story of the thing’s maintenance bills and depreciation to date.Bearing in mind that a decent 70’s Triumph 2.5 is now probably worth around 5 times as much as that Merc.
@ CarryFast.
How can you defend the 2.5 Triumph when you say in an aside that you simply threw away the P.I. system?
Look, I think they were iconic cars, and I owned a TR6 so do know about the ‘Lucas Spit System’ of fuel objection but they weren’t engineering masterpieces. Good design, yes. Pretty Italian styling, yes. But at this time a cast iron block was getting passe. Electrics were ok for the era.
The Stag engine needs a book written about it: company politics, River already having the Buick based V8; union problems; iron block, alloy head although this was successful in other designs; quality control, casting sand found in cars overheated and broken down.
I would own an older Triumph tomorrow in a instant but be realistic…big ask… they were iconic for us Brits of ‘a certain age’ but they were not world beaters done down by some shady plotters.
.
Carryfast:
So we replace German imports with domestic production putting us back in the position that we were in 1972.On the basis that the home produced product has no trade tariffs/barriers applied.
Em . . . domestic production?
Which part of,reset the clock back to 1972,or we die as both an independent sovereign country and economically crushed by the weight of the combination of life blood sucking EU ‘contributions’ and an unsustainable trade deficit,didn’t you understand.
All of it to be honest.
How long is it going to take to build a domestic manufacturing base and train a domestic workforce to create output to the levels of 1972? You really are that mad professor from Back To The Future, aren’t you?
Commercial Vehicle and car manufacturing from scratch is a non starter because of the money time and technology involved but people scaremongering about things we will be short of like medicines to name one. We produce medicines here already so there’s no big disruption to produce more. What we should be asking is why did the production get shifted abroad in the first place , probably either we sold out to foreign companies or cheap labour. The constant negativity of not being able to do things for our selves is what gets me . We need the EU to provide , and this mad idea that we will get charged a fortune in tarriffs if we export to the EU , its a two way street.
A caller on 5 Live from Scotland made a couple of points the other day , firstly saying she was sick of hearing Sturgeon going on about Scotland voting to remain in the EU , and secondly what about the people up there who voted leave . The remainers dont take any notice of a majority vote unless its in their favour . And dont forget Scotland becoming independent how long would that take , borders new currency , no payouts from the UK , scotland are paid from the UK more money per head than any other country in the Union.
Personally I don’t understand why Scotland wants to be independent what have they really got to support there structure especially with the best of North sea oil and gas gone, also now Wales is on the same tack but with the steel and coal industries very depleted what do they have left to generate wealth, a few sheep and beef cattle and without support of subsidies these would have gone bang long ago, if I were them I would just carry on as they are as without support from Whitehall they would be dead in the water, Buzzer.
Buzzer:
Personally I don’t understand why Scotland wants to be independent what have they really got to support there structure especially with the best of North sea oil and gas gone, also now Wales is on the same tack but with the steel and coal industries very depleted what do they have left to generate wealth, a few sheep and beef cattle and without support of subsidies these would have gone bang long ago, if I were them I would just carry on as they are as without support from Whitehall they would be dead in the water, Buzzer.
The phone in on 5 Live had scots in favour of leave and remain and independance, the Irish had murmurs of a united Ireland which would i imagine cause bloodshed again , didn’t we bail southern ireland out not so long ago ? but the Welsh weren’t interested infact one caller stating he was totally commited to the UK. I personally think they should do what they think is best for them , we cant lose really
Not wanting to put our industry down, but, can anyone imagin that taking place in the UK, then or now, Harvey[/quote
CF’s answer
Let’s say 20 minutes extra work per day x 5 days = 100 minutes per week x 47 weeks = 78 hours extra work per year.In return for 5 extra days = 42.5 hours off ?.Great deal …for the boss.
I think this answer is why we lost our manufacturing industry. Harvey
HRS:
Not wanting to put our industry down, but, can anyone imagin that taking place in the UK, then or now, Harvey
[/quote
CF’s answer
Let’s say 20 minutes extra work per day x 5 days = 100 minutes per week x 47 weeks = 78 hours extra work per year.In return for 5 extra days = 42.5 hours off ?.Great deal …for the boss.
I think this answer is why we lost our manufacturing industry. Harvey
HRS:
Not wanting to put our industry down, but, can anyone imagin that taking place in the UK, then or now, Harvey
[/quote
CF’s answer
Let’s say 20 minutes extra work per day x 5 days = 100 minutes per week x 47 weeks = 78 hours extra work per year.In return for 5 extra days = 42.5 hours off ?.Great deal …for the boss.
I think this answer is why we lost our manufacturing industry. Harvey
A something for nothing culture among the employers and Brit workers,generally,not being prepared to be shafted.Combined with a geopolitical agenda which was always about keeping Germany top dog in Europe.Absolutely.
Which probably shows why the Cons are so keen on the EU while ‘Labour’ is obviously happy to sacrifice the Brit working class to create its bigger agenda of an EUSSR.
On that note you seem to have selectively missed the bit about a supposed ‘militant’ Brit union selling out our morning and afternoon breaks.Obviously already making a better product for less wages and investment than our German competitors not being enough.
Franglais:
@ CarryFast.
How can you defend the 2.5 Triumph when you say in an aside that you simply threw away the P.I. system?
Look, I think they were iconic cars, and I owned a TR6 so do know about the ‘Lucas Spit System’ of fuel objection but they weren’t engineering masterpieces. Good design, yes. Pretty Italian styling, yes. But at this time a cast iron block was getting passe. Electrics were ok for the era.
The Stag engine needs a book written about it: company politics, River already having the Buick based V8; union problems; iron block, alloy head although this was successful in other designs; quality control, casting sand found in cars overheated and broken down.
I would own an older Triumph tomorrow in a instant but be realistic…big ask… they were iconic for us Brits of ‘a certain age’ but they were not world beaters done down by some shady plotters.
.
Firstly I ( eventually ) threw away the PI system because,just like the D Jetronic EFI system in the BMW E3 I bought later,it was maintenance heavy.Just as expected of ( totally unnecessary at the time ) primitive pioneering technology.On that note you do know that plenty of people also converted the BMW E3 to triple webers also thereby creating a more powerful result and a more reliable easier to maintain package and still do on the few survivors and later types.Also it too had an iron block but with the lose lose of an alloy head casting made of cheese.In my case being on an apprentice wage when I had the Triumph it had to be twin Strombergs because I couldn’t afford triple webers for it.While in the case of the BMW I was up to my kneck in too many rust issues and other expensive maintenance headaches to get involved in a Weber conversion too.But trust me its Injection system also suffered all the usual issues including its stupid vacuum sensing ECU going nuts in the middle of an overtake which had to be aborted with a four wheel lock up and throwing the thing at the scenery on the offside in spectacular movie stunt style. Also another time an intake backfire which blew its two piece pressed alloy inlet manifold/airbox assembly apart having missed a factory recall to replace it with a cast one when it was new.
While again you seem to have airbrushed out the relative price differences.In which case none of your double standards stand assuming that BL had just put a 3.5-4.5 Rover V8 in the Triumph both 2.5 and Stag.No surprise that the geopolitical environment in favour of the Germans wouldn’t allow it.So yes conspiracy not ■■■■ up.
As for iron engines,like the Rover V8,the Jag V12 is an all alloy motor.In which case,unlike iron,any considerable overheat for whatever reason,can render the whole engine scrap in a matter of minutes for nothing more serious than a failed thermostat or water pump etc.With the Americans having long ago shown that an all iron engine doesn’t have to weigh a ton.
cav551:
That depends on whether it was paid or unpaid holiday. Unpaid the boss is laughing all the way to the bank.
I provided the figures based on it being paid holiday in exchange for an obviously unpaid 20 minutes overtime.IE the boss gets an extra 20 minutes of work every day in exchange for an extra week holiday every year. No surprise unproductive sales staff,probably earning more than their fair share as salaried 9-5,telling those on the front line factory production side that they must work more for less.
cav551:
That depends on whether it was paid or unpaid holiday. Unpaid the boss is laughing all the way to the bank.
It was paid leave Cav
Yes ‘1 week’ extra paid ‘per year’ in exchange for 20 minutes extra unpaid ‘per day’.Feel free to show any figures as to how that possibly equates to an extra week paid holiday per year.As opposed to a net increase in hours for less pay.
Buzzer:
Personally I don’t understand why Scotland wants to be independent what have they really got to support there structure especially with the best of North sea oil and gas gone, also now Wales is on the same tack but with the steel and coal industries very depleted what do they have left to generate wealth, a few sheep and beef cattle and without support of subsidies these would have gone bang long ago, if I were them I would just carry on as they are as without support from Whitehall they would be dead in the water, Buzzer.
Which is exactly the same argument as any European Federalist would use against anyone wanting to Leave the EU.So why are you so keen on the UK union,in which remote Scottish MP’s can decide English matters and vice versa,but you’re supposedly against the European Union for the same reasons ?.Make no mistake we’re in the EU because to a Federalist bigger = better UK Union today EU tomorrow.Bearing in mind that Scotland doesn’t want to be ‘independent’ at all it’s just taking advantage of the so called ‘Nationalist’ vote to replace the UK with the EU.Allied with all the other Federalist rabble from Cons to LibDems.
out of the water like the Bismark if BL had dared to do it.All within the single market by that time so no bs import duty excuses. 
No surprise unproductive sales staff,probably earning more than their fair share as salaried 9-5,telling those on the front line factory production side that they must work more for less.