I always though an MBG was stronger, frame-wise. Back in 69 I was stopped
waiting to turn in my fisrt S1. I got rear-ended by an MGB. At the last moment
he tried to swerve around me and hit my bumper at about a 45 degree angle. It
tore the right rear fender off the Alpine, pulled the left about a foot toward
the right and made a hell of a mess. The Alpine was totaled, the B messed up
his
left front fender, grille and bumper.
I haven't had anything good to say about an MGB or its driver since.
The Alpine is a fun car, much more unique and attracts a better class of driver.
Al
TIGEROOTES@aol.com wrote:
> ...> which is best, MGB or Sunbeam Alpine?
> > John Prior, Chichester
>
> John,
> In many ways you are comparing apples and oranges. Unlike the MGB,
> the Alpine chassis never had to undergo a several hundred pound reinforcement
> to install a larger engine (I refer to the MGC 6 cylinder) when it was
> developed from an Alpine to the high torque Ford engined V8...the Sunbeam
> Tiger.
>
> Early MGBs are especially desirable as Vintage race cars because they
> are lightweight...EVEN IF the doors won't close when the cars are sitting on
> an uneven surface. That is not the case with Rootes cars: they were not
> underbuilt.
>
> The original target market for MG was as a replacement sportscar for
> the sportscar purist: the target for Rootes Alpine was the daily-driving
> American public and they succeeded in building an excellent compromise car
> between a true sportscar and a refined second family-car.
>
> From all aspects, the performance of Rootes cars can be developed far
> beyond their original configuration: they are perhaps the penultimate
> undertuned post-war car.
>
> Although BMC had the advantage of being able to continue improving
> their machine after Chrysler ended Alpine production, in my opinion late MGBs
> are and always were junk.
>
> New US smog laws required their cars to be detuned and their
> performance was thus (legally) limited. Also by law, they were forced to
> raise the cars to pass American bumper height requirements, so they look
> silly as a sportscar and more like a four-wheel-drive.
>
> For some reason, they found it necessary to change other things that
> worked fine. A perfect example is the engine mount arrangement: early MGB
> mounts are straightforward and simple to replace, however, late cars have a
> trap built in to them and it is a bloody hard job to change a simple rubber
> mount. Why? There was no logical reason for that
> change...except...possibly...to add to the man-hours when serviced at the BMC
> Dealerships...
>
> Perhaps I have worked on too many MGs over the years. They have
> provided me a good income and many a chance to use my dynamic vocabulary. Oh
> yeah...a Sunbeam Alpine is a better car than an MGB. So there!
>
> Jim Leach Pacific Tiger Club Seattle
|