mg-mmm
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Replica MGs

To: mg-mmm@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: Replica MGs
From: Bullwinkle <yd3@nvc.net>
Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2002 00:15:14 -0600
References: <3C393292.00001C.61669@Pmgj2>
Reply-to: Bullwinkle <yd3@nvc.net>
Sender: owner-mg-mmm@autox.team.net
Greetings:

I am new to this list, but not MG's.  I've been on the MGS and mg-t list
for a couple of years and the twin cam yahoo groups list.

I joined this list not because I own a MMM car, but because I want to
learn more about them and the historical aspects.

IMO: If a car is using many new pieces it is original if it has remained
on the road or complete as pieces for most of it's life.  It's ownership
should be able to be traced back to Abingdon.

The example Lew presented about the "J2" which only has the frame number
is a good example of a fake.

If a car was more or less "whole" when purchased, replacing worn out
components should not make it a replica or fake or detract from it's
"originality."

Starting with a discarded frame or engine and adding bits here and there
to create a car you've created a replica especially if another car has
already carried the number for a long period of time.

If you have the frame, the guarantee plate, and many of the other
components, and ANOTHER car doesn't contain any components that were
originally on yours (except for perhaps the engine) then your "new" MG
might not be considered a replica or fake but likely referred to as
resurrected.

Blake

///  unsubscribe/change address requests to majordomo@autox.team.net  or try
///  http://www.team.net/cgi-bin/majorcool
///  http://www.team.net/mailman/listinfo
///  Archives at http://www.team.net/archive/mg-mmm
///  Send list postings to mg-mmm@autox.team.net


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>