I think the Triumph series through the TR6 is much easier to restore. I
have done both of these cars and the TR bodies bolt to a real frame. The MG
is unit body and, in my opinion, much harder to restore. You can do a
ground up restoration of a TR and take everything apart without a torch.
Not so with the MG.
I am not sure about the power, it depends on how you plan to drive the car
and what you will do with it.
Rick
TR4A CT57505L
----- Original Message -----
From: Shapiro - Kenneth J. <kshapiro@umd5.umd.edu>
To: <triumphs@autox.team.net>
Sent: Saturday, July 24, 1999 9:20 AM
Subject: Triumphs vs. MGs...whatsa scoop?
>
>
> OK...I just bought my first Triumph (1970 GT6). Though I've
> owned and restored many other cars (Corvette, Porsche, Lotus),
> a Lotus Europa was my only venture into the Lucas world of
> darkness. So, I'm curious, what's the general comparison
> between Triumph and MG? As a "newbie: into this arena, it seems
> that Triumphs have always been more powerful. Is my perception\
> accurate? How does body work compare...is one more rust prone
> than the other? Was quality comparable or not.
>
> I know this is a Triumph group, but let go the bias, and tell
> me what both sides think.
>
> ken
>
|