mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

MG vs TR

To: mgs@autox.team.net
Subject: MG vs TR
From: Keith Wheeler <keithw@sand.net>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 09:46:59 -0800
Yep, here we go again.  Personally, I'd say buy the
TR-7, *if* you want to spend the effort to fix some
major problems.  Like the horrid engine.  I've got
a '77 TR-7, a sunroof coupe, bought for a little
of nothing with an engine that ran on 3 cylinders.

Of course it will get one of the 3.5 blocks I've
got sitting about.

A lot of MG folks attack the '7 as being the end of
MG.  Well, I may be mistaken, but I remember hearing
something about them English folks still building MGs,
but then I'm from Arkansas, so I may be confused.

Yes, to many the TR-7 symbolizes the end of the classic
MG period.  Yes, the had many problems from bad gearboxes
(the 4 speed version) to a cylinder head to block integration
problem that plagues all the 4 cylinder cars.

But then it is also a neat car.  You'd be surprised how many
people think a '7 is modern, even exotic.  And, if you care
to do some engineering, they can be impressive.  A TR-8 won
the SCCA pro rally championship (was that '80 or '79?).
The engine bay begs for a Rover V-8, and the looks impress
even the younger "all I want is a Ferrari" crowd.  The car
didn't end MG, poor management ended MG *AND* Triumph.
All of the "should haves": 'B V-8 in the US market, either
the Sprint or V-8 in the TR-7, most everyone here knows the
drill.

I've got a '7.  And 4 MGBs.  And a Healy.  I'd have an
E-type if I had the place and funding for it.  I'd
also love to own a Mini, and a GT-6, and a 'B GT, and
a Marcos of any flavor.

The TR-7 is an interesting idea turned into a car with
a lot of problems.  The most "modern" of the classic
British sports cars, and a car that since most enthusiasts
turn their backs to it, will only get rarer, at least
rare to find a clean, cared for example.

-Keith Wheeler
Team Sanctuary                  http://www.TeamSanctuary.com/


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>