| I prefer the 63 B.  I had two of them and they were simple and a pleasure to 
drive.  With no modifications I had the second one up to 98 mph and it still 
wanted to keep going.  Unfortunately the road I was on ended in a small town 
with a right turn.  It was easy to work on and I used it as a daily driver.  
Never had to do much to it.  The only negative was the lack of overdrive!  I 
think I tuned the engine and carbs once in two years.  I have the 76 B now 
and what a difference.  The 76 B is much slower and higher.  Although it does 
have OD and a few other "modern" amenities.  I definitely think the 63 B was 
the best.  I want another one...but I would keep the 76 B....but would trade 
both for an "A"!
Scott
76 B
---------------------------------------------------------------
In a message dated 6/01/00 11:25:54 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
JPGarner@UCDavis.Edu writes:
> Actually, though, and i know this is hereasy to most people's ears, but i
>  like the look of the rubber bumber cars far better.
Hey what's not to like? Slower, more ungainly, jacked up compromised 
suspension - I guess some people can overlook all that if they happen to 
prefer the esthetics of the rubber bumper look ;-)
My preference would be for the last of the 3 synch cars with the large 
layshaft - 1967, or the first all synch cars, before they buggered up the 
poor things with smog gear - 1968/9.
Of course being at heart an MGA man, I have a striong liking for 3 main 
bearing cars - the 63 is in some ways more attractive.
But then the only one I currently own is also the only one with balls - a 
1969 MGC. Maybe that's why I have no time for the late cars - I insist that 
my cars have some performance along with whatever looks they were born with.
Bill
 |