There were considerably more MGs made than Spitfires, so you'll have
a much easier time finding parts for the MG; and, in my experience,
they're a bit cheaper.
Good luck.
Tedd
> From: cavsct@concentric.net
> To: <triumphs@autox.team.net>
> Subject: Spitfire or MGB???
> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 15:39:07 -0400
> Reply-to: cavsct@concentric.net
>
> All,
>
> Understanding the lists understandable bias towards Triumphs, I have a
> question. I know that several of the listers have or have had a MG.
>
> Next month I will be returning from Indiana with my high school and
> college sweetheart (a 1974 1/2 MGB). Presently, my daily driver is a 1980
> Spitfire. The MG will take some work to get it running, but is otherwise in
> good condition. It has been garaged for about eight years.
> I would like to do a frame up restore of one of these cars and use the
> other as my daily driver. My question: Should I restore the MG or the
> Spitfire? What are the pros and cons of either? Expense? Ease of
> restoration? Other considerations?
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Rob Schuck
>
>
Tedd Pitts
93 Chrysler Le Baron (convertible)
80 Triumph Spitfire
79 Jeep CJ-7
79 Triumph Spitfire
73 Triumph Spitfire
65 Triumph Tiger motorcycle
|