At 10:10 AM -0400 10/5/00, WSpohn4@aol.com wrote:
>In a message dated 10/04/00 11:16:00 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
>owner-mgs-digest@autox.team.net writes:
>
>So what's wrong with rebuilding your Armstrongs, or buying new? Tubes offer
>no real improvement over them, especially for the street, they wear out
>sooner, and many of the front conversions would delight Rube Goldberg.
>
>And I would discount most of the reports of people that have made the
>conversion, if I were you. You are dealing with 2 things there. First, the
>guy telling you that the tubes are so great has just spent more than a few
>bucks doing the conversion. It just isn't human nature to expect him to say
>"Gee, that was sure a waste of money".
>
>Similarly, human nature for some reason precludes people, when they try the
>new set up and rave about how much more effective it is, from remembering
>that what they are comparing it to wasn't a brand new factory installation,
>but a set of totally thrashed, leaking Armstrongs. Hell, you could bolt a
>couple of those rear tailgate gas lifts in place and the guy would still be
>cliaming (perhaps correctly) that what he had now was better than the pitiful
>situation he had before.
>
>Bill Spohn
I have run them both ways. My MGA is running the original lever
action shocks. My wife's GT is still running the tube shock
conversion, but it is being converted back when we refurbish the car
this winter. I have found no benefit to tube shocks, and have found
the levers to last longer and to be more sturdy.
--
Bob Shaw
Check out Shaw's Garage at http://www.mlcltd.com/shawsgarage/
My British Car is NOT leaky - it's merely marking its territory.
|