Most people would say the "pillow" is the bastardization...
<g>
At any rate the change wasn't driven by customer demand, but by US
regulations. I doubt if anyone at the time saw it as an improvement, if not
because of the looks, then because of the tiny gauges and absence of a
glovebox. To prove my point, there are many disparaging references to it in
the contemporary periodicals.
So I would have to say I am in complete sympathy with Don on this issue. If
I had a Heritage shell I would be trying to build it as a Mark I, not a Mark
II.
on 11/24/03 5:58 PM, Don Malling at dmallin@attglobal.net wrote:
> The '68 Canadian MKII cars came with a metal dash. The European MKII
> came with a metal dash until about 74 maybe? Not sure -- the early 70's
> anyway.
>
> So it's not so clear to me how it is a bastardization.
>
> What is your opinion of putting a Moss supercharger in an MGB? How about
> a Rover V8 in a roadster? (I think they only came in GT's?). How about
> rear tube shocks? How about rubber bumper to chrome bumper conversion.
> Maybe a wooden steering wheel? None of those things ever existed as
> production items. Where does it end? Who draws the line and where?
>
> I have a 68-74 BMH body shell. I have to build something on it. I
> believe I will have an authentic '68 Canadian spec MKII when I'm done --
> Oooppps except for the Moss Supercharger -- now I will agree with you
> there, that is a bastardization -- don't you agree? :-)
>
> I think it's really a question of whether you like the pillow dash or
> not. Lots of people like the metal dash. For some reason the MKII's in
> England and Europe had the metal dash into the early 70's. Wonder why....
>
>
> Don Malling
--
Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires
|