- 1. MGB '69 better than '67? (score: 1)
- Author: Bert.Otten@nni.nl
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 14:43:01 +0100
- ** Reply Requested When Convenient ** Hi to you all, Although this is my first posting on this list, I subscribed almost a year ago. So I have been able to get used to all the problems and technicali
- /html/mgs/1995-11/msg00221.html (7,963 bytes)
- 2. Re: MGB '69 better than '67? (score: 1)
- Author: wzehring@cmb.biosci.wayne.edu (Will Zehring)
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 09:10:55 -0500
- Bert asks: Appologies to all owners of post '67 Bs, but in my mind there is no hard decision to make here. I would absolutely go for the '67. I'm not sure what a "weak" geargox is in this case. Other
- /html/mgs/1995-11/msg00223.html (8,298 bytes)
- 3. Re: MGB '69 better than '67? (score: 1)
- Author: BMcKarney@aol.com
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 17:28:57 -0500
- While the goal of your vintage MGB "to be a daily driver without problems" is probably not in the cards, I can attest that my '67 B has been close to that for well over 100,000 miles. I have had abso
- /html/mgs/1995-11/msg00248.html (7,155 bytes)
- 4. Re: MGB '69 better than '67? (score: 1)
- Author: jello@main.cpcnet.com (Phil Bates)
- Date: Fri, 10 Nov 1995 23:45:23 -0400
- This is a hard decision. I drive a 67 with 3 synchro overdrive. It is great. It is also simple, and has no emmissions (sp?) equipment or requirements. I love driving it, and it is certainly more asth
- /html/mgs/1995-11/msg00261.html (9,398 bytes)
- 5. Re: MGB '69 better than '67? (score: 1)
- Author: "Dave Etherington" <detherin@gold.interlog.com>
- Date: Sat, 11 Nov 1995 02:17:06 +0000
- I second Will. I've had both a '66 and a '73, and while I prefer the interior of the '73, the '66 was more reliable and easier to work on. The O/D is the clincher. Neither of mine have had one, and i
- /html/mgs/1995-11/msg00266.html (8,819 bytes)
This search system is powered by
Namazu