Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nice. When I got mine in the mid 60's it was already hopelessly rusted. I can't guess why but it was so bad that the body flexed so much with the top down that the doors would pop open. But it was a lovely car.
Of course that's correct. but it's also being way too strict with the term.
Roadsters evolved to include cars with glass side windows.
That would mean no MGB was ever a true roadster, etc.
No company is ever going to attempt to market a roadster with soft side windows today.
No, MARKETING evolved it. But there have been and are true modern roadsters. The Viper RT/10 comes to mind, and Caterhams.
And of course, there are still a lot of true roadsters in kit form, or in small runs of limited edition cars. Just because there are few/none made by mainstream manufacturers does NOT mean that the term just gets to get slapped on anything else you want.
Ture roadsters still exist and are available both new and used, and so long as they DO exist, the differences between roadsters and cabriolets are important and valid.
It'd be like saying, oh, there's only like 3 station wagons available anymore, so we'll just use station wagon as the term for something else.
Those are all niche cars, but I don't think it's marketing as much as what the public wants. Zipper or sliding side windows are a PITA and not very secure if you value your processions inside.
Again, Porsche produced a "roadster" that still had roll up glass windows. The Triumph TR6 is considered the last of the mass produced British roadsters by many auto publications.
Actually, Porsche called that the Convertible D. THEY never called the '59 roadster (the link is wrong, as if it's a '59, it's a convertible D: Porsche Convertible D Registry - 356A History )
Now, the 356 B convertible was termed roadster as it was designed to go racing without the winndsheild or side windows and had revised doors and windshield frame (to be easliy removeable).
Oh, and no MGB (including mine) was a roadster. The MGA, MGTD, and MGTC were, but the B was not.
Oh, and another one, the Jeep Wrangler, CAN be a roadster with it's side curtain doors installed. But it's a Jeep so it's in a category all it's own (not a car, not a truck, but a jeep... hehehe)
Those are all niche cars, but I don't think it's marketing as much as what the public wants. Zipper or sliding side windows are a PITA and not very secure if you value your processions inside.
it doesnt MATTER if it's a niche car. It's a distinct bodystyle. The fact that the majors don't make one right now has no bearing on it any more than it does on the definition of phaeton.
No one makes a damn rumble seat either, but that doesn't mean we just start calling anything else on the car a rumble seat.
Since true roadsters exist on the roads and in garages and in workshops, then the definition stands. Even if they aren't new and even if they aren't being built by major manufacturers anymore for the mainstream.
Definitions are how language works, and there's no "in my opinion" on it or we can't communicate. Definitions are what let you know what I mean when I type this sentence.
British cars of all stripes have been little more than charming stationary decor for 50 years. Two times they promised that they had quality under control and two generations of enthusiastic consumers squandered money on cars that depreciated to near zero in just a few years because, frankly, the cars were such junk they had no secondary market. Despite my English ancestry and my love for almost all things English, they have lost the right to another try.
Quite a bit of that time, they were under direct government control.
Be that as it may, I still loved my British cars (both Jaguars, all three MGs, and all three Range Rovers). I'm still thinking of getting more Jaguars in the future (and not new ones, either).
Quite a bit of that time, they were under direct government control.
Be that as it may, I still loved my British cars (both Jaguars, all three MGs, and all three Range Rovers). I'm still thinking of getting more Jaguars in the future (and not new ones, either).
Well, I loved some of mine too. My favorite Brit car was my 3.4 Jag sedan with a 327 Chev and a manual gear box. Everything that had been converted to positive ground worked great.
Having fond memories of many a mile in the Colorado Rockies with a Morgan ... +4's, 4+4's, and a frequently borrowed +8 from a friend's collection .... aren't these still being built, although in a very limited production as in years past?
Having fond memories of many a mile in the Colorado Rockies with a Morgan ... +4's, 4+4's, and a frequently borrowed +8 from a friend's collection .... aren't these still being built, although in a very limited production as in years past?
The classic British roadster was the inspiration behind the Mazda Miata. In many ways, the Miata perfected the roadster. Should a British car company try to bring back the roadster?
What British car company? Their industry is dead sadly. Its really a sad story. Ironically the INDIANS own some old British companies!
I pray we don't go down the path of the British motor history.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
