[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Why unibody?

Subject: Re: Why unibody?
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 13:37:03 EST
I'm going to suggest that the way MG assembled the MGB had a lot to do with 
the choice of a unibody.  This might be a chicken before the egg idea, but if 
MG had made MGs with chassis... where the traditional assembly order is 
chassis, running gear, body... then they would not have been able to have 
ready painted and assembled shells delivered from Pressed Steel to which they 
later added the running gear.  Just an idea, because I guess the Abingdon 
plant was too small tohave a paint plant and a body assembly area and what 
   My second idea is that the stunning Frua MGA-replacement, which was built 
on a chassis and noted in books as being VERY HEAVY, lead them to think about 
unibodies to save weight.
  Also, BMC was really into unibodies at that time.  
   Was there some strange deal between Pressed Steel and MG over an MG that 
the tooling was "soft die" or something like that, and there was a deal where 
MG had to pay for this cheaper experimental soft die tooling but if it ended 
up not wroking, PRessed Steel would re-tool in normal body dies...  and the 
soft dies didnt' make it through the first pressing or something like that so 
MG got real tooling on-the-cheap... So maybe PRessed Steel was trying to make 
the MGB a show car for thier talents and urged a modern monocoque shell?  Was 
the MGB that car?  I might be mixed up.  

   Just a few ideas...
John Elwood
Visit The World's Greatest Site Devoted to Farina Magnettes:

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