Group,
I'm old enough to have been around when these MGBs ware new cars. I
remember when I first saw a new MGB in 1974 (still with chrome bumpers but with
two big rectangular black rubber blocks bolted on to each end) every one I saw
looked like it sat at least an inch higher than any previous MGB I'd ever seen.
I've owned a rubber bumper MGB (1978) and, when new, the rubber bumper cars do
not look like they sit any higher than the 1974 car described above.
I, currently, own a partially restored 1974 chrome bumper "B". My MGB
was the previous owner's wife's car. All parts replaced by the previous owner
are correct for this cars vin. He replaced the front springs, but his wife did
not want the rear springs replaced because she didn't want the car sitting so
high that you could seen the underside of the rear.
My cross member question is a result of me wanting to know whether, by
a conscience decision - not a we're out of the old one's so use these decision,
Leyland started using the rubber bumper cross member on production MGBs that
still had chrome bumpers. The bottom line is, in the Washington DC area, I
never saw a chrome bumper with rectangular rubber block car that didn't look
raised relative to all MGBs I'd previously seen (around an inch - especially
noticeable looking from the rear). If the cross member's the same as the older
cars, then the springs would have to be responsible for the raised ride height
???
So, I'm looking for a way to identify the cross member on my car.
Ultimately, I'd like to replace the springs and have a car that sits no higher
than a '62 - '67 MGB (as originally designed).
Sorry For The Rambling, Skip
|