PVanWig@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 98-07-09 02:30:16 EDT, davebrown1@earthlink.net writes:
>
> <<
> That's because you haven't driven mine :-)
>
> Dave Brown/Palmdale, CA
> >>
> Dave its the looks not the performance that get me. And my old 65 1298 got a
> radar ticket at 112 mph once so it ran ok!
> Paul
Paul,
My parents frequently said, "There is no accounting for taiste." However, as
one old enough to remember the advent of the 5mph bumper and the toll this
requirement took on automotive styling until the technology caught up, I must
admit that I did not like the rubber bumpered MG's in general when they
appeared. However, I ran across such a deal on this car ($500, 78,000 original
miles, good upholstery and body, just had to put the carburetter back on and
get it running again) and it had been a while since I had a Brit in my garage,
I bought it. This is my first MG, I had owned Triumphs before.
Well what do you know, the little car grew on me. I don't mind the black
bumpers so much. In fact, I rather like them now. With Weber and headers and a
bigger anti sway bar installed, the car performs very well.The car has proven
reliable. And, in truth, from the driver's seat, it is hard to see the
bumpers, no matter how you feel about them.
When you publicly express your disdain for cars like mine, I must think that
you have forgotten the essential reason for owning these cars: they are fun to
drive. Mine is.
Your original remarks showed a lack of concern for how owners of these cars,
including myself . I doubt that you intended to offend. But when you "dis" a
vehicle over which I have invested many hours, I am a bit taken aback.
My point is, if you drove one of the rubber bumper cars, you would find that it
delivers the same enjoyment as earlier versions. If you insist on driving an
original Midget, I suggest that you invest in a "T" series car.
Should I see you on the road around Southern California some day, I promise to
flash my lights and give you a friendly wave of the hand.
Dave Brown
|