mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

In defense of RBBMGs

To: mgs@Autox.Team.Net
Subject: In defense of RBBMGs
From: Gene Fox <genefox@bellatlantic.net>
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 1997 09:42:00 -0500
I own two rubber bumper MG's one is a GT and the other is an 80 LE. 
I do not object to rubber bumpers.  I think that a great deal of thought
was put into their design.  They are more functional than the chrome
bumpers and offer more protection for the car and occupant.  They are
stylish and they do update the lines of the car. Having said that,
rubber bumpers always bothered me a bit because  they were  always
black, (I thought the color was the problem).  They looked  somewhat out
of place on any of the cars except the cars painted black!  How could
this be?  More stylish, more functional, yet not quite right. The more I
thought about it the more I focused away from the color.  Then it hit
me!  It wasn't the color that bothered me, it was the difference in the
"gloss" or "shine" that made them appear mis-matched. So I took a big
gulp and when it came time to paint my GT I decided to have the bumpers
matched to the car. Matching the paint was no problem.  Matching the
gloss was!! After many attempts and 8 weeks in the paint shop, we
finally got it right
 So... to all you chrome bumpered MG jockeys the answer to the objection
of having only black bumpers is an additive called "flex"!  You put it
in paint.  You then paint your bumpers to match the car. Then you put it
in clear coat to match the gloss.  This makes the difference between an
OK job and a great job.
 I've done it to my GT and I can attest that anyone who has ever seen it
does not think it a "second fiddle" to chrome bumpered MG's. I'm
thinking about doing it to the LE.  Although both bumper and car are
black.  It would look much better if the "gloss" on both was the same.
Respectfully submitted IMHO!
P.S.  There is a picture of my GT on the MG's of Baltimore website.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>
  • In defense of RBBMGs, Gene Fox <=