[Blenheim Boy]

Ashley,

I admit that I’m quite new to Setright’s writing. I do not question your integrity and I respect your experience with cars. But you do seem to expect others to fall into line with your opinion on LJKS, without really providing solid proof as to why. I feel that I have read nothing but slander so far.

Quote: I think he describes one race in a Bristol that was finished either with a hole in the sump or a rod through a block. Very unlikely I'd have thought.

Very unlikely I’d have thought is not proof, that is opinion. Come on now! I consider a man walking on the Moon very unlikely but I could not hope to disprove the Moon landings with nothing but vague cynicism!

Jonathan Wood has unearthed ‘new’ information on the 400. This is wonderful news, but if it really is new information, then how could Setright know of it? He’s been gone since 2005.

From what I have learned of Setright so far, yes, he held strong opinions, or ‘prejudices’ as you referred to them. Who doesn’t?! Strong opinions will always meet resistance. Because you and your colleague Dr Kimberley did not agree with those opinions does not make Setright wrong.

I fully acknowledge the errors Setright made in Bristol Cars and Engines, which he was brave enough to address in print in a later book. Out of interest, would this issue have anything to do with the allegations of the Chrysler V8 engines not being as ‘Bristolised’ as previously thought?

I would recommend Setright’s Drive On! and Long Lane With Turnings to revaluate your thinking.

Footnote: You mentioned Steve Cropley, the editor of Autocar. Despite its heritage, this is a magazine that supposedly had an ‘exclusive’ test drive of some stylists wet-dream concept car that did the rounds a few years ago. The vehicle in question had no engine, and Autocar were caught pushing the car down a hill for photography purposes. I hope that for the sake of the integrity of the magazine and its editor, that the 'road test' was not published...

BB