... and against
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
SIR,
The “landmark” issue of MOTOR SPORT is not what it should be. After 41 years of readership my reaction is to cancel my order.
I am yours etc,
R F OUVER SOUTH CROYDON, SURREY
SIR,
Condolences on the passing of my great love of 46 years, MOTOR SPORT, RIP. She was with me man and boy since 1951. Now, alas, she has gone to join the glossies and I am left grieving.
I am yours etc,
WARWICK HANLEY, CROOICWELL, NSW, AUSTRALIA
SIR,
Not a mention of the Australian GP, sportscars, BTCC or rallying. Being blunt, if MOTOR SPORT continues in this style, after a family total of more than 40 years, I will not renew my subscription.
I grew up with this bloody magazine, I’m 43, and that was not an easy sentence to write.
I am yours etc,
GEORGE J KING, MULGRAVE, VICTORIA, AUSTRALIA
SIR,
Judging by the April issue of MOTOR SPORT , the title has become a misnomer. It should be re-named Ancient Motor Sport, or Motor Sport Archaeology. Unless you change your ways pronto you will be losing a long-established customer.
I am yours etc,
IAN J G BERRY, ENFIELD, MIDDLESEX
SIR,
I have no interest in a publication devoted almost exclusively to historic and vintage motor racing. Fortunately, there is now a much wider choice of magazine for enthusiasts than was the case when I began subscribing to MOTOR SPORT many years ago. You have indeed messed it up.
I am yours etc,
PROFESSOR MP ESCUDIER, WILLASTON, CHESHIRE
SIR,
None but the churlish would quarrel with the excellent photographic and journalistic content of the new MOTOR SPORT but which unthinking reprobate decided to change its size? The abominable new size now sticks an inch from shelves carefully designed to bear it. How can a cohesive volume for 1997 be bound?
I am yours etc,
DAVID CULSHAVV, WIGAN, LANCASHIRE,
SIR,
The page numbering of your April issue begins with page one. To maintain the continuity of volume LXXIII, the first page should have been 301, with the Contents page being 303. That is going to muck up the index for 1997, isn’t it? What are you going to do to ensure that loyal readers can continue to bind each year’s editions with indices?
I am yours etc,
MICHAEL CRAWFORD, BIRKENHEAD, MERSEYSIDE
(We anticipated this point and that’s why,from last month, we have printed conventional folio numbers for each issue on the outer edges of our pages with the volume’s corresponding numbers on the inner edges. This way, those who bind the magazine will be able to refer to their volumes as easily as ever while others will be able to find their way around the magazine with greater ease AF)