I agree except for the ugly remark re the rubber bumpers, I like all the MGs
but prefer the rubber bumper to those sad tinsel clad ones.;-))
At 07:27 09/11/96 -0500, you wrote:
>Seems the world has been running out of 'real' MGs since the introduction of
>the T series, with each new model being labeled by some as 'not a real MG'.
>. . right up to the rubber bumper Bs (I certainly think they're 'real' MGs,
>just ugly ones). The MGF would seem to have at least some continuity of
>design, since Gerry McGovern, its chief designer, worked on the EX-E way
>back in 1985 and some MG people were evidently on that design team. Also,
>Don Hayter(who designed the B) says that the B replacement MG was trying to
>push through Leyland was a mid-egined vehicle.
> Besides, MGs have never been snobby, blue-blood cars. I compare them to
>border collies -- bred for a purpose with a nobility of spirit that
>surpasses any pedigree.
> I think the F is a 'real' MG -- though I wish Rover had adopted new
>nomenclature to acknowledge the gap from the B to the F. Perhaps using an R
>for rover( as in the RV8). MG-RF? Or MG-R1.8. Or?
>
>Michael, New Bern, NC
>
>
>
Jack Baker
75 MGB
85 300 ZX T
from Oak Bay in
Beautiful B.C. Canada
http://www.islandnet.com/~baker
|