mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: engines

To: "Randy Rees (Starwave)" <Randyr@starwave.com>
Subject: Re: engines
From: "Christopher M. Delling" <cdelling@mail.ic.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Aug 1996 07:35:09 -0400
Randy Rees (Starwave) wrote:
> 
> Anybody know why MG never fitted the twincam engine to a B, also not that
> I would or could, but will a twin cam fit into a B without modifications?
> 
> Randy Rees
> Starwave Corp.    http:\\www.starwave.com\
> Systems Administrator
> RandyR@starwave.com
>                                                       |
> Owner                 ________________|_________________
> 1967 Cessna 150 G                 \    |  _  |   /
>        N2683J                             \  [[ O ]]. /
> Sgt. U.S. Army NG (Wa.)             /**|**\
>                                               0'     0    `0

Randy-

>From what I gather on the history of the Twin Cam (from the book "MG" by 
Ian Penberthy, it would seem that the engine was a nightmare from a 
durability standpoint, hence the reason it was dropped.  It was 
engineered as a "black hole" project, since MG did not recieve the 
funding to pursue the concept from BMC.  Seems that the corporate theory 
was to use exisiting components wherever possible.  As a result of the 
shoestring budget, reliability was poor, and the engine was 
tempermental, and was subsequently abused, gaining a poor reputation.

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>