MG Midget.... - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cscmc1 · #31 07-17-2008, 09:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

I've heard those are not bad. I should have limited my comment to the Triumphs that came after the TR4. Those ain't so hot, IMHO.

Speak for yourself! I have owned two TR6's and they are excellent cars. Leaps and bounds more reliable than the MGB GT I owned (and the MGBs and Midgets my friends owned), and more powerful/fun to drive. I'm not into TR7's, but the TR8 was "interesting" at least. If I could afford it, I'd buy a TR250 -- the TR4 styling, but with a 6 cylinder. But then you start getting into Austin Healey territory, so just buy a 3000 and be done with it!

cscmc1 · #32 07-17-2008, 09:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Edit: whatever you get just don't park it on your driveway, because it will stain it if your MB's havn't already.

They're not leaking... they're marking their territory.

cscmc1 · #33 07-17-2008, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rs899

. Even if you de-smog a later one, you can't get away from evil things like Stromberg emission carburettors. Triumphs are all (except TR-7) body on frame-everything comes apart. MGs are unibody. Is that being clear enough on a 40 year old, poorly made car?

Early Sprite/Midgets are OK. Triumphs can get very good fuel economy- both of mine can get to 30mpg and provide entertainment.

Rick

Hey Rick -- have you seen the Goodparts tri-carb intakes for TR6's? I have one (and spare carb) to install... just need to get around to it. The Saab and Mercedes keep me busy enough as it is.

Honus · #34 07-17-2008, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cscmc1

Speak for yourself! I have owned two TR6's and they are excellent cars. Leaps and bounds more reliable than the MGB GT I owned (and the MGBs and Midgets my friends owned), and more powerful/fun to drive.

The TR6 is more powerful, but is not as much fun to drive, IMHO. I think we will need to agree to disagree on this. IMO, the MGB is on the shortlist of all-time great cars. The unibody seemed to have been designed to maximize rust, but otherwise are the best of their type.

Quote:

...If I could afford it, I'd buy a TR250 -- the TR4 styling, but with a 6 cylinder...

I'd rather have the 4-cylinder. IIRC, the 4 and the 6 had the same displacement, so the 4 had more punch. I think the TR4 also had SUs, which are superior to the Strombergs that came on the later Triumphs.

MS Fowler · #35 07-17-2008, 12:53 PM

As some of you know, I go the AACA Fall meet at Hershey every year, ( There is always room for more, PM me if you need a place to crash for a night or two--I have a 5th wheel).
Last year there must have been a half dozed AH 3000 fresh out of the resto shops. IIRC they were all priced at about $48,500.
Pretty!

cscmc1 · #36 07-17-2008, 12:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

The TR6 is more powerful, but is not as much fun to drive, IMHO. I think we will need to agree to disagree on this. IMO, the MGB is on the shortlist of all-time great cars. The unibody seemed to have been designed to maximize rust, but otherwise are the best of their type.I'd rather have the 4-cylinder. IIRC, the 4 and the 6 had the same displacement, so the 4 had more punch. I think the TR4 also had SUs, which are superior to the Strombergs that came on the later Triumphs.

You can swap the carbs if need-be, and swap in a cam. The smogged TR6's lost quite a bit on the compression ratio side, as I recall. I bought the Moss competition springs, Koni front shocks, and rear shock conversion kit (to get rid of the Armstrong lever-arm shocks) for my current TR6, but even my old one with stock suspension and slightly-lower-profile tires out-handled my MG, but the MG's suspension was probably just worn out. But my "British Car" friends who tried both marques always stuck with Triumphs over MG's. I tried to resist, having owned the MG first and loving it, but that first TR6 spoiled me. It was a rustbucket body-wise, but man was it fun and reliable.

Re: engine displacement, didn't the 6-cylinder win the torque battle? I may be wrong on that. Either way, the TR4/250 styling is tops.

Anyway, don't get me wrong; I love MG's too! I have just gotten a little partial to the Triumph after putting so many miles on my first TR6. It was a daily driver, driven year-round in IL, and never missed a beat! That said, the '67 GT I had was a beautiful car aesthetically.

cscmc1 · #37 07-17-2008, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

Last year there must have been a half dozed AH 3000 fresh out of the resto shops. IIRC they were all priced at about $48,500.
Pretty!

Dad's got a very nicely restored 100-6. MAN, I love that car. Maybe someday I'll have one!

Honus · #38 07-17-2008, 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cscmc1

...Re: engine displacement, didn't the 6-cylinder win the torque battle? I may be wrong on that...

I always thought that the TR4 motor was torquier, but that wasn't based on anything reliable. One of those pieces of automotive folklore that car people like to carry around. I do recall my friend's TR4 had more get up and go than his sister's GT6.

Quote:

Either way, the TR4/250 styling is tops.

That's true, although I had so much fun in my MGs when I was a kid, there is no way for me to be objective about it. Seeing an MG always brings a smile to my face.

Way back in the day, I had a memorable race in my 1972 MGB against a TR6. We were traveling north on I-95 between Fredericksburg and Woodbridge, Virginia. I was 17 at the time and invincible, so I opened it up. Surprisingly, I left him behind, although that might have less to do with horsepower and more to do with him having more common sense than I did. The engine in my B had been rebuilt by Arthur Tweedale. If we have any Northern Virginia British car buffs from back in the 60s and 70s, they may have heard of Mr. Tweedale. He was a mechanic extaorindaire. My B was completely stock, right down to the smog pump, and it ran GREAT.

That was a fun trip on I-95. Glad I'm still here to remember it.

cscmc1 · #39 07-17-2008, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dculkin

Way back in the day, I had a memorable race in my 1972 MGB against a TR6. We were traveling north on I-95 between Fredericksburg and Woodbridge, Virginia. I was 17 at the time and invincible, so I opened it up. Surprisingly, I left him behind, although that might have less to do with horsepower and more to do with him having more common sense than I did. The engine in my B had been rebuilt by Arthur Tweedale. If we have any Northern Virginia British car buffs from back in the 60s and 70s, they may have heard of Mr. Tweedale. He was a mechanic extaorindaire. My B was completely stock, right down to the smog pump, and it ran GREAT.

That was a fun trip on I-95. Glad I'm still here to remember it.

I hear you. I took my first TR6 from IL to Tampa, straight through. We hauled butt the whole way, and the top was down the whole trip. Man, that was an adventure... I was watching the temp and oil pressure gauges like a hawk! That car made it down and back with no fuss at all. It was a '76 (de-smogged) and the trip was in '93 or so. Funny now that I think of it -- the car wasn't even 20 years old at the time.

So, have you ever considered getting another 'B? (Or maybe you already have one?) My TR6 sits neglected in the garage too often. I need an extra weekend day once in a while to give her the attention she deserves.

Mistress · #40 07-17-2008, 03:36 PM

I had a 68' MGB back in the day. Crappy Lucas stuff.

cscmc1 · #41 07-17-2008, 03:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mistress

I had a 68' MGB back in the day. Crappy Bosch stuff.

*Ahem* -- crappy LUCAS stuff, perhaps?

Honus · #42 07-17-2008, 04:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cscmc1

...So, have you ever considered getting another 'B? (Or maybe you already have one?)...

In fact, I bought a disassembled B. I got it from a guy who disassembled it and then ran out of steam. It sits, neglected, in my equipment shed. I figure I'm in no hurry. It's out of the weather. Some day, it will make it to the top of the project list.

Honus · #43 07-17-2008, 04:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cscmc1

*Ahem* -- crappy LUCAS stuff, perhaps?

IMHO, that whole Prince of Darkness thing is overblown. I've had 3 MGs, not including my current neglected project B. One of my Bs, a 1973 model, lived up to its bad reputation electrically. The other two - a 1962 A and a 1972 B - were very reliable compared to other cars of that vintage.