I learned the value of a convertible in one of these. A 67 1/2 1600 was
my brother's first car. He kept it for 10 years or so. I drove it a lot
when he was off in Okinawa and I was in college.
He also bought a '69 2000 autocross car and turned it in to a full road
racer. I'm pretty sure he only ran the 1600 racing. The guy he bought
the 2000 from had just about everything messed up on the engine. It
had Solexes.
I remember we towed the race car with the street car once or twice.
Manhattan, Ks, to Kansas City. 120 miles. Loaded up with college stuff.
Must have been spring break.
The metal is definitely thinner.
I like the front styling, not the rear so much.
I'd sure like the power of that 2000.
Back in the late 70s, parts were hard to get. There were a few mail
order places. Dealers did have parts but they weren't cheap. I wonder
what parts are like now.
Paul.
Christian, Skip wrote:
> Group,
>
> You guys seem interested in these cars so I'll tell what I know. When
>in college, myself and a couple of friends used to buy these cars for $0-50,
>fix them up and sell them for $500-1000. A lot of work for not that much
>money, but it was better than flipping burgers !
> Both engines 1600cc and 2000cc (I forget the exact displacements) are
>superior to the MG engines. The 1600cc pushrod engine made the same
>horsepower (96 if I remember right) as the 1800cc MGB engine. I had the
>1600cc engine in a Datsun sedan (my first car), and despite my best effort, I
>just couldn't kill it ! The SOHC 2000cc engine, power wise was great.
>Redline around 7500 and it would pull all the way there. As a factory option,
>the 2000cc could be ordered (or installed by dealer) with 2 twin choke Solex
>carbs, hotter cam, and deep sump oil pan for a solid 150-160 HP. The only
>down side to the 2000cc engine was the timing chain tensioner was by oil
>pressure and, from personal experience, it worked about as well as the Porsche
>design (bad !!). Both engines had aluminum heads. Early versions had 1500cc
>engines - I never tried one of the 1500 cars.
> 2000cc cars had five speed trans, 1600's had four speeds. Trans
>shifters were horribly sloppy but not bad enough that you couldn't find the
>correct gears. I never drove one with bad syncros or trans noise, a big
>complement since most of the cars I drove were trashed.
> The biggest disappointment was the cars had zero steering feel. They
>cornered OK but were light in the rear and the rear would really hop if a bump
>was hit while turning. Cornered a little better than a TR-4 - not as good as
>an MGB. Suspension about the same as an MGB - independent with coils in the
>front and live with leaf springs in the rear.
> Body would rust about like an MGB. Better quality metal but thinner.
> Hope I remembered all that correctly. If you get a chance to drive
>one, go for it, especially a 2 liter car.
>
> Skip '74 B
|