>I don't know why the MG community discounts these cars, is it because they
>haven't driven one? Is it because it doesn't have a convertible top, if so
>why isn't the MGPB saloon discounted? Jeez, they look like a Jag, have the
>classic MG grill, and drive like an MG, why the scorn?
Having watched this thread for the last few days, I'd like to offer my
humble opinion of the perceived value of most sport sedans.
I, like many others, I suspect, am well into my middle years (Male
menopause, some would claim). The reasons I am into MGs are threefold:
1) memories of driving one as a young buck
2) ego - "Don't you wish you could have one?"
3) keeping alive anything that gives me a heart-pounding experience
I, for one, do not find that a sedan (albeit, a nice one) does anything to
satisfy any of these reasons. Not that some people may not have a Z type for
some of these reasons, or other reasons entirely. However, I suspect that
they a probably in the minority. The price and respect these cars attract is
thusly affected.
It's hard enough to justify owning a LBC in Minnesota with 6 months of the
year not conducive to driving, the difficulties and expense of maintaining
an obstinate little piece of British engineering, and providing garage space
for three of these cars, without wanting to maximize my reasons for
ownership. In other words, the sedans don't give ME enough bang for the
buck. (INHO).
I certainly admire the Z, the Y, the 1100 and 1300, and even the MGA coupe,
but I personally, don't want or need one. The MG PA Airline Coupe, however,
is a different story. It's rarity and age would sufficiently feed my ego to
the point that I would sacrifice the memories and heart-pounding thrill of
open-air motoring to have one in my garage.
My hats off to those ZA and ZB owners who do what they enjoy.
Lew Palmer
1932 MG J2
1950 MG TD
1959 MGA (roadster)
|