Jeff Dutkofski asks about MGB-GT's:
> Interior looked average--
> seats were cloth covered (I'm not an in-depth expert--I thought seats would
> be leather?), rear seat looked to be in good shape.
I believe 73-74 GT's were the only B's which offered cloth. I personnaly
prefer it over the vinyl since it isn't *sticky*.
> 1.) What body/frame spots should I pay special attention to in looking for
> hidden or obvious signs of rust? The B-GT does have Ziebart plugs
> in the door sills, BTW. Will this sort of treatment do anything to
> harm the car?
Look in the usual brit-car places: sills, lower front and rear wheelwells,
bottoms of doors, the MGB Crack of Doom (a crack which develops under the
outside door mirror next to the vent window), and on GT's look for cracks
where the rear hatch compartment meets the top of the rear fenders.
The PO of my '77 roadster did a Ziebart job on the underneath and engine
compartment of the car. Good intentions, but over time the stuff starts to
get gooey especially when exposed to engine heat.
> How does a B-GT "compare" to a
> droptop MGB? I know I would be giving up the tousled hair look, but is
> a B-GT still a fun car to drive? It should be more rigid since it is a
> hardtop.
As far as value is concerned, I have seen some publications that rate the
GT worth more than a B roadster, but that is probably due to the fact that
*only* around 150,000 GT's were built (out of approx. 515,000 total B's).
Yes, you are right, the GT is more rigid and will offer a more stable and
quieter ride if that is what you are looking for. I've owned a '74 GT
and now I have a '67 GT that will someday be restored, so I am somewhat
partial to them. Believe me, the GT is still a fun car to drive.
Steve
|