I realized late last night while sanding and painting the orginal seatframes for 69Gt that the last time these were painted correctly I was 10 years old. Then I started wondering how many of us take the time to actually do it right. Either its cost prohibitive, or I wanted something more modern, or it didn't really need that anyways, that we end up with cars far removed from where they started (I'm guilty). Like the bus steering wheel orginal to the 62-69 cars, or the non darkening rear view mirror I replaced. I've removed them but saved the parts in order to have all the orginal parts. Twenty years from now when someone is trying to find a somewhat original MGB from the 60's, well not sure that will be possible. I intend to keep my 69GT as orginal as possible and in the spring when I sell, I'll keep that in mind when choosing the buyer. So a thanks to the folks who have chosen to stay the course.
Let me say this also, I have 3 MG's and the other two are far from orginal! Guilty as charged. :) Ok got that off my chest.
Restoration rant. Thank you if your doing it right!
The MG Experience ~ MGB & GT Forum ~ Archives
MG MGB and MGB GT Tech Talk
MGB & GT Forum: Restoration rant. Thank you if your doing it right!
http://www.mgexperience.net/phorum/read.php?1,1030445,page=1
Join the discussion, post your photos, or ask your own questions. Membership is FREE!
I've been rolling this over in my head the last couple weeks as well. But I came to the decision that I didn't buy this car for the resale value nor the next prospective owner; I bought it for me to fix up and enjoy. So if that means putting a chrome bumper conversion on my '77, :-) then so be it!
And by the way... I'm originally from Chehalis.
Very true Brian,
I aim to keep my 67gt as original as possible, and restoring it to original spec. I have already taken off any mods that were on it when I purchased the car.
But I do think its each to their own when it comes to the details, I wouldnt say Im a purist, but I love the original spec of MGs and will keep my own car very original. But I feel if you are going to do a job, whatever it is do it properly, Im learning this as I go with my resto,
Ill be keeping the Les Leston steering wheel, A, because I love it and B, its a period item and finally its worth quite abit of money, but I am going to get hold of the orignal large wheel in the future, just to have.
Mark
I'm going to keep this one original and not restore no matter how faded it gets (rust is not an issue where I live).
The perennial chestnut and conundrum.
I guess, after years of these discussions, I'd have to say that doing any job "right" is worth a lot in the long run. Half arsed is never good enough. But I tend to primarily think in terms of maintenance and installation, with much less emphasis placed on authenticity, which to my mind is a whole other can of worms. I don't mean by that that authenticity is somehow more or less, just a different objective which can involve doing of things correctly, but not lead to the same end result.
I grew up with MGs and got my '71 right after High School. I modded that with period accessories to make it mine, faster and safer (spoiler, air cleaners, bullet mirrors, etc) and later when I got the '73 B I have added a few things to our '73 in the same vein. I don't see anything wrong with period accessories and a few later type add ons too. Its our cars and we each can add to them or not as we wish. Now if you want to keep it bone stock or unrestored forever and that includes never painting or upgrading that's cool too! There's even a class for that now in most shows.
My wife asks me why I want to keep the old engine from the Magnette when I replace it with an 1800. I say "for originality." She asks "Are you going to put it back?" "NO," I respond.
At this point the exasperation is quite evident in facial expression, body language and tone.
"Then why bother storing it?????"
These things are hard to explain, it seems.
You guys are maintaining originality or storing your original parts that you no longer use, so that when I restore my 1967 GT, I can ask you all sorts of questions about originality. And then I can answer them for someone else. And so it goes.
Mike,
Yes, Somethings are unexplainable, but you know ,somehow, that it's the right thing to do!
Preservation is correct,and right thing to do in the long run.
Dean
,
This is not aimed at anyone on this board but having worked for a car maker for a number of years I am constantly amazed at the attitude of " this was the way the factory did it so it must be the best".
Simply put the factory did it that way because of costs reasons and no other.
Witness: lever shocks , leaf springs and "rubber bumpers".
They were done because they were convenient , already available.
In other words it was the cheapest way at the time.
Technology moves forward (we are discussing this on the internet after all ) and if you do not wish to take advantage of it then that is fine but do not make arbitrary judgments about those who do.
Pete.
You are saving that "only available for two years" mirror then? :)
If originality is what you want, that is good. Different people want different things.
To me the essence of the MGB is the way they look and the way they drive. This forum is full of people who have put in Webers, Ford and Nissan Transmissions, redesigned wiring and electricals, v6s and v8s and every other things under the sun. All of this tinkering are attempts to improve the way it drives and performs. As long as people drive them, then they are doing what the MGB are really designed for. If I had a perfectly original MGB, it belongs in a museum not in my garage. I would rather have something to drive.
Its a value judgment, pure and simple. My car is an everyday driver, and I modify the car for safety and comfort. Its not original, but its my car and everything I do, I try to do right way. I have SU's on a 1980, so is that a sin or an improvement? Personally, I think MG's should have dual SU carbs even if the factory decided the late model RB's should have single zenith-strombergs.
I'd say with my 62 I did it 'right'
http://www.mgexperience.net/phorum/read.php?1,871703,page=1
Having said that, I don't think with a car that was produced in such massive numbers that sticking with originality should be of any serious concern. Maybe for the very early chrome bumper cars like this one, but certainly not for the later models.
Personally, I have plans on getting in with some of the V8 guys here and doing a 73 or so car with lots of mods. :)
I'm just trying to keep my B together and running with no more therapy that necessary :)
I have 79 mgb and am atempting to keep it as original as possable but i have some mods such as a up to date radio and the po put in a weber carb and they put in ac which i may remove (doesn't work) oher thatn tha she is all original
Peter7307 Wrote:
Witness: lever shocks , leaf springs and "rubber bumpers".
They were done because they were convenient , already available.
In other words it was the cheapest way at the time.
"
Please! That sounds like a load of crap!
I'm sure cost did figure into their decisions like any manufactor, but I'm sure performance and looks also figured in. Take the example of lever shocks. Certainly not the cheapest shock in the world, but it does work well and is very long lasting.
FWIW - I have a resto-mod.
It's my car. I paid for it with my own money. I will do with it what I please. Thank you very much have a nice day.
What John Moore said x2. Lever shocks are as "right" for these cars as twin SU's and maybe even a little bit more reliable! My levers are original to the car (1969). They've never been rebuilt and they work perfectly. Will you be able say that about your fancy new Monroe sensa-tracs in 40 years? How about your high dollar Koni's? Think about it.
JNickell Wrote:
Its a value judgment, pure and simple. My car is an everyday driver, and I modify the car for safety and comfort. Its not original, but its my car and everything I do, I try to do right way. I have SU's on a 1980, so is that a sin or an improvement? Personally, I think MG's should have dual SU carbs even if the factory decided the late model RB's should have single zenith-strombergs.
"
But, it's fair to point out they really decide that--the us government (effectively) did--the factory continued with SUs for other markets after ours were emasculated, so this "modification" is really very different from most.
The car is mine. I didn't buy it for any one else and the next owner can do what he/she pleases with it too (Of course, I'll be dead).
If I decide to make an Auto-x monster one year and restore it the next and then put in an Allison V-12 later, well, that's my headache!
Having said that, I'm in the resto-custom group for my "dailys" and in the full-mod group for the racecar.
If I wanted a "perfect" car I'd do one of two things... Buy a new one or pay the biggie bucks for a competent shop to do the work.
Fact is, I like messing with my cars and, even though I have to wonder what they were thinking, the PO has rarely been truely stupid... just not the way I'd do it.
I'd like to think my methods are "best" but it's unlikely anyone following me will agree!
Thank You Brian,
I too am proud of the fact that, over the years, I've gone out of my way to keep the car as period-correct as possible, while trying to improve long-term reliablility. Couple of examples are:
Retrofitting with an (electronic) SU fuel pump and ditching the cobbled-in-with- hose-clamps, inline, facet-style pump.
When hanging the stainless steel exhaust I spent plenty extra to get the correct hangers and ditch the cobbled in steel strap hangers & clamps that had been put in by DPO - also kept the stock cast manifold and fabbed up stainless clamps to minimize oxidation in the contact areas.
Obtaining the correct stainless braid covered fuel lines around the SU's.
When converting to wire wheels, spent extra to obtain correct rear axle which maintains tire to wing clearance and factory track spec.
And whe I re-paint in a couple of weeks, I will go with the correct/oem new racing green - just as the Abingdon Gods intended!
Brian:
I tend to be a bit more charitable to the DPOs since whatever bodges they have performed kept the cars on the road through a period when common financial sense (or reality) would have dictated crushing the car. Believe it or not floor pan replacement was just done when these cars were current; it fell under the heading of "Frame Damage" and was a death knell to many a MG.
The bondo and steel wool fix is not so hard to understand if you put it into historical perspective; the method was actually described on the side of the can of bondo! I have used it a few times as a teenager trying to keep some of my $200 MGs on the road.
Now that I have a few more miles behing me, I realize that I am a chartered member of the MMTBC and often have to ask myself if this has not put me lower on the food chain than the DPO tag?
Regardless, unless it is a case of outright fraud, I look at these bodges as an acheological dig and am thankful that the car is getting a new lease on life becasue someone refured to give up on the car.
Pete
MMTBC= More Money Than Brains Club.
JMoore Wrote:
I'm sure cost did figure into their decisions like any manufactor, but I'm sure performance and looks also figured in. Take the example of lever shocks. Certainly not the cheapest shock in the world, but it does work well and is very long lasting.
FWIW - I have a resto-mod.
"
Take the other two examples...rubber bumpers and the ride height increase ;
quick and cheap but NO performance increase and the looks factor is totally subjective.
Leaf springs; The carried them over from the MGA. The original design for coils was consigned to the "nice idea but" bin.
No performance benefit there either.
By the way how many years did you work for a mainstream maker?
I was with FORD in the prototype costing dept.
The section which works out how much it costs to put something into production.
Pete.
JMoore Wrote:
Peter7307 Wrote:Quote:Simply put the factory did it that way because of costs reasons and no other.
Witness: lever shocks , leaf springs and "rubber bumpers".
They were done because they were convenient , already available.
In other words it was the cheapest way at the time.
Please! That sounds like a load of crap!
I'm sure cost did figure into their decisions like any manufactor, but I'm sure performance and looks also figured in. Take the example of lever shocks. Certainly not the cheapest shock in the world, but it does work well and is very long lasting.
FWIW - I have a resto-mod.
"
John,
I have a late model B - by the time BL started doing the mods to keep the US market, they really were looking for ways to meet the requirements at the lowest cost possible (and maybe for guys like me - reversible). I also really don't think the next owner will honor me for preserving the early "rinky-dink" smog stuff that really didn't help prevent smog and seriously hurt performance.
These cars (dare I say it?) are somewhat like VW beetles - made relatively cheaply for a mass market. Some will want to keep their beetles totally original - particularly if they are early and/or rare - but not many people will complain if a guy with a late model superbeetle crunches his original bumper and decides to replace it with nerf bars. As far as the quality of my restoration - I don't know what "doing it right" means. If someone wanted to do a true restoration, they could literally spend $100,000 to exactly match the original carpet, have the paint applied in the original series using period equipment, use only NOS parts, locate the original upholstery manufacturer and so on. (Don't believe me? Look at some of those Corvette guys... ) Short of that, most of us are sacrificing some combination of quality, price or speed. Just my two cents.
Did anyone see the Monster garage or Pimp my ride type show where they took a beautifully restored old Anglia and turned it into a tubbed out V8 hot rod. Even the guys on the show were making comments like " kinda hate to rip out this interior". But they did it and it was kind of sad. I do say its up to the owner though. It went from one person's dream car to another's version. Who was right?
RSS Wrote:
It's my car. I paid for it with my own money. I will do with it what I please. Thank you very much have a nice day.
"
Seconded.
I'm still trying to get over the fact that John Moore said 'crap'!
Wow!
Chris
Some folks wish to recapture an era, or their youth, and in doing so like to keep things original.
Some of us wish to capture some fun and try to make these cars better just for the sheer joy of driving them. I believe that having fun was the original intent of the designers of the MGB.
If your not having fun, you're missing the whole point.
Bob
JMoore Wrote:
Peter7307 Wrote:Quote:Simply put the factory did it that way because of costs reasons and no other.
Witness: lever shocks , leaf springs and "rubber bumpers".
They were done because they were convenient , already available.
In other words it was the cheapest way at the time.
Please! That sounds like a load of crap!
I'm sure cost did figure into their decisions like any manufactor, but I'm sure performance and looks also figured in. Take the example of lever shocks. Certainly not the cheapest shock in the world, but it does work well and is very long lasting.
FWIW - I have a resto-mod.
"
I'll submit the Peter is closer to the truth than Moore is. I worked in the design office of a Teir 1 auto supplier (until the layoff 4 weeks ago), and EVERY decison was cost driven.
To point to single part like a lever shock and suggest that because it was a more expensive part, it proves the point that cost was not the primary driver ignores the fact that the shock does not live in a vacuum, it's connected to other parts that also need changing if the shock is changing, assembly process, tooling, and equipment also changes. There are hundreds of ideas that were discarded at my prior employer because, while the part cost was reduced, the cost to implement exceeded the cost savings.
Remember these cars were designed for a 6 or 7 year production run, the next shell was always just around the corner.
MG was not in business to make cars- it was in business to make money. They had a business model for building the B. The least expensive car that met the minimum acceptable performance and handling of that model was the most profitable car to build.
I prefer to believe I look at the past with clear, rather than rose colored, glasses.
I think we can all get along because all of us are keeping our cars out of the junk yard. I have a friend who runs a salvage yard and he told me the last time I saw him at a cruise night he had just crushed an MGB the week before and thought of calling me instead. I told him to call me next time before he crushed an MG - somebody somewhere can use it parts off the car if its not too far gone.
As far as the using what was cheapest part of this discussion the whole chassis design of the MGB dates back to the Y tourer of the 50's and was used on the TD, TF, A and B, so not engineering and tooling for a new chassis design body and and parts was clearly the objective in saving money. MG looked into hydro elastic suspension and other ideas and clearly in later years had the option of borrowing triumph technology such as tube shocks but chose to stay with the same design for almost 20 years.
twentyover Wrote:
MG was not in business to make cars- it was in business to make money. They had a business model for building the B. The least expensive car that met the minimum acceptable performance and handling of that model was the most profitable car to build.
"
A sad but all to true summary of the car business which is after all a business.
Back in the days of Sir William Lyons of Jaguar and David Brown of Aston Martin the influence of the man at the top was far greater and the cars I think reflected that.
These days spreadsheets , budget committees and life cycle cost / analysis / benefit studies rule and if a company can't make a profit in one year then the shareholders put their funds into a company which will the next year.
I personally don't agree with that and I definitely do not think this is a good thing but it IS the way companies and car companies especially are run and have been for some time.
Cheers , Pete.
ourmg Wrote:
Did anyone see the Monster garage or Pimp my ride type show where they took a beautifully restored old Anglia and turned it into a tubbed out V8 hot rod. Even the guys on the show were making comments like " kinda hate to rip out this interior". But they did it and it was kind of sad. I do say its up to the owner though. It went from one person's dream car to another's version. Who was right?
"
If you think that was bad take a look at this.A programme called chop shop picked up a perfectly good GT and did this to it.
for those of you with a nervous disposition you may wish to look away......
I was doing a search for the episode on the Anglia debacle and its from Monster Garage. Guess I missed the very end because they couldn't get the engine started so they crushed the car with a 10,000 lb beam at the end of the show. There was a petition going around on hot rod sites to protest it- but its old news now. Now thats a waste to everyone- restorer or rodder.
Here's a link but its in French- can't find a link in English.
http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6ttnf_monster-garage-la-ford-anglia-p23_auto&ei=dG-XSdidI8yatwfyqvixCw&sa=X&oi=video_result&resnum=4&ct=thumbnail&usg=AFQjCNFo4egJ-LZ6RWj4xWTeVb3Lk92Eww
This is an archived discussion from the The MG Experience Forums
If you would like to post a reply, please click below to visit the The MG Experience Forums:MGB & GT Forum: Restoration rant. Thank you if your doing it right!
Archive Index | The MG Experience Forums | Return to The MG Experience