randall977 | Mar 04, 2011 11:25 am |
---|---|
Subject: Classic and Sports Car Rapide Article... This months (April) Classic and Sports Car has a four page article on the four door V8 and Lagonda Rapide (LR 105 I think) - Page 132 - 136 by Martin Buckley. |
TVJL | Mar 07, 2011 12:33 pm |
---|---|
Subject: Re: Classic and Sports Car Rapide Article... Thanks for the 'heads up', Christian. Martin used to have a Rapide a few years back and gave monthly updates in the magazine about it as a 'staffer car'. He even wrote to me some time ago, looking for help about an article (though I can't now recall the outcome). I assume that he sold the car, but David will know. |
David | Mar 07, 2011 6:03 pm |
---|---|
Subject: Re: Classic and Sports Car Rapide Article... If I recall 1077PP (LR153) belonged to a friend of Martin. I haven't seen published updates for a while, perhaps they've stopped |
TVJL | Mar 09, 2011 9:52 am |
---|---|
Subject: Re: Classic and Sports Car Rapide Article... I have now read the piece in C&S. It is, as ever, a typical example of modern print journalism and of commentary on the post-war Lagondas - superficial, littered with hyperbole, exaggeration and inappropriate 'modern' perspective and 'side', and inaccurate not only in some of the minor details given (forgivable) but also in respect of very basic points of historical importance (unforgivable) e.g. the relative importance of the two marques intra-brand when David Brown acquired them, the relative success of the 2.6 and 3 litre models in production, and the real premise for the battle between John Wyer and David Brown re funding the Rapide project. In fact, IMHO by comparison the article is not quite as bad as that which appeared in Octane magazine a year or so ago on the '4 door' Aston Martins, which for me was a real journalistic low point for that publication. |
randall977 | Mar 09, 2011 10:40 am |
---|---|
Subject: Re: Classic and Sports Car Rapide Article... It wasn't good and it's a shame they chose a non standard LR (if there is such a thing) for the article. But it is publicity... |