on 9/28/04 6:53 PM, Alan Harriman at vtech@usol.com wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Sep 2004 17:24:16 -0700, you wrote:
>
>> I wouldn't categorize it as a bolt-on, weekend job, no. And a lot more work
>> would be required to lower the car, which IMO would be absolutely necessary
>> -- otherwise you wind up with the "granny in a miniskirt" look...
>>
>> But if that's your bag, hey...different strokes... <g>
>
> Am I the only person in the world that actually likes the look of the
> rubber bumper MGB's? To me, they give the car a bit more of a cleaner,
> more modern appearance. Of course, just my opinion <g>
>
> Alan Harriman
> 1980 MGB
Well, yes, actually, you are... <bg>
Seriously, I prefer the classic look of the chrome bumper cars, but it's not
like I despise the rubber bumpers so much that I would feel compelled to
perform surgery on one. If you want the mod cons of the later cars, you can
come to terms with the more modern appearance (well, except those purists
that still consider it blasphemous).
But my point was mainly that I didn't think the combination of CB looks with
RB stance was very attractive -- you get a car that looks like it is up on
tiptoes -- not very satisfactory after going to all that trouble. At least
on the RBBs the heavy-looking black bumpers tend to keep it visually
grounded. The LE-style airdam in particular improves the frontal aspect,
avoiding the "chinless" look.
--
Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Mountain View, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires
Check out the new British Cars Forum:
http://www.team.net/the-local/tiki-view_forum.php?forumId=8
|