Well, in Clausager the 62 is shown with a body-colored radiator
diaphragm, but the 64 (18GA), 69 and later models are black. The support
bars match the diaphragm where shown -- they are not visible in the 1964
photo. In my 66 the bars are body color, but it has been resprayed at
least once. The diaphragm is black.
This entire issue is ignored in Clausager's long list of running changes.
I would guess that the 63 you mention was correct, and that it changed
perhaps in the 64 model year, possibly with the introduction of the 18GA
motor (Feb 64). If you are really concerned with correctness, you could
try to figure out when in 64 your car was built. Just divide the total
number of cars built that year by 12 to roughly calculate how many were
built per month, then compare your vehicle number to the first one built
that model year. This info is in the Moss catalog, but be careful. In
several issues, the column headings for Model Year and Calendar Year have
been swapped. If you compare the data in the columns, it will be obvious
if this is the case. The first car number built in each Model Year should
be a *lower* number than the first one built in that Calendar Year, since
the model year begins the previous September (or July).
gary & traci had this to say:
> i was looking thru an old copy of mg magazine and saw a picture (b & w)of
>what was supposed to be a factory picture of a 63 engine bay . the radiator
>support and support bars were painted body color.all the ones i've seen are
>black were they ever a body color or was this really a newer picture of a
>repainted car. i may have to get some more brg paint
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the red one with the silver bootlid.