Max,
Numerous references have been made to "Clausager". It seems there is a
worthwhile
MG book I do not own. Would you mind telling me the complete Author, title and
publisher? TIA.
Jim
Max Heim wrote:
> Well, in Clausager the 62 is shown with a body-colored radiator
> diaphragm, but the 64 (18GA), 69 and later models are black. The support
> bars match the diaphragm where shown -- they are not visible in the 1964
> photo. In my 66 the bars are body color, but it has been resprayed at
> least once. The diaphragm is black.
>
> This entire issue is ignored in Clausager's long list of running changes.
>
> I would guess that the 63 you mention was correct, and that it changed
> perhaps in the 64 model year, possibly with the introduction of the 18GA
> motor (Feb 64). If you are really concerned with correctness, you could
> try to figure out when in 64 your car was built. Just divide the total
> number of cars built that year by 12 to roughly calculate how many were
> built per month, then compare your vehicle number to the first one built
> that model year. This info is in the Moss catalog, but be careful. In
> several issues, the column headings for Model Year and Calendar Year have
> been swapped. If you compare the data in the columns, it will be obvious
> if this is the case. The first car number built in each Model Year should
> be a *lower* number than the first one built in that Calendar Year, since
> the model year begins the previous September (or July).
>
> gary & traci had this to say:
>
> > i was looking thru an old copy of mg magazine and saw a picture (b & w)of
> >what was supposed to be a factory picture of a 63 engine bay . the radiator
> >support and support bars were painted body color.all the ones i've seen are
> >black were they ever a body color or was this really a newer picture of a
> >repainted car. i may have to get some more brg paint
> >
> >gary
> >
> >
>
> --
>
> Max Heim
> '66 MGB GHN3L76149
> If you're near Mountain View, CA,
> it's the red one with the silver bootlid.
|