on 7/5/01 7:03 AM, WSpohn4@aol.com at WSpohn4@aol.com wrote:
> This is just a discussion about whether there is any need to swap
> transmissions. My suggestion was that there is no advantage from either a
> utilitarian point of view (the MG trans isn't inherently weak), or a monetary
> one (MG boxes with OD are still available, often for less money than is
> needed to fit a Sierra box, for instance), and that swapping in major
> assemblies from other makes of car might somehow detract from, I don't know
> how to say this more precisely, the 'MG-ness' of the subject car. I suggest
> that the discussion continue, if there is anything more to be said, along
> those lines.
I think Bill has summed up this particular point very nicely. I might just
add in reference to his penultimate sentence that in my mind the
transmission is one of the strong points of the MG experience (therefore why
would you want to replace it?), as opposed to an allegedly "weak" point such
as the Z-S carb, or the Lucas fuel pump, that are frequently "upgraded".
--
Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the red one with the silver bootlid.
///
/// mgs@autox.team.net mailing list
/// (If they are dupes, this trailer may also catch them.)
|