From h.duinhoven at planet.nl  Wed May  2 11:16:50 2012
From: h.duinhoven at planet.nl (Hans Duinhoven)
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 19:16:50 +0200
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
Message-ID: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>

http://www.carnewschina.com/2010/04/19/saic-working-on-new-mg-roadster-engine-up-front/

Looks better than the previous gig.

Cheers,

Hans Duinhoven
71 BGT on the road again 

From ptrmgb at gmail.com  Wed May  2 12:57:08 2012
From: ptrmgb at gmail.com (Paul Root)
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 13:57:08 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
Message-ID: <10B7BE23-95A5-4975-A8DB-D417250965C6@gmail.com>

Looks ok. Not great.

Autoweek gave the MG SUV thing at Bejing  the Best Concept award.

On May 2, 2012, at 12:16 PM, Hans Duinhoven wrote:

>
http://www.carnewschina.com/2010/04/19/saic-working-on-new-mg-roadster-engine
-up-front/
>
> Looks better than the previous gig.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hans Duinhoven
> 71 BGT on the road again _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ptrmgb at gmail.com

From d_dibiase at yahoo.com  Wed May  2 13:17:53 2012
From: d_dibiase at yahoo.com (Dan DiBiase)
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 12:17:53 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
Message-ID: <1335986273.61040.YahooMailNeo@web39405.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I wonder if the driving wheels are also up front....

Dan D
________________________________
 From: Hans Duinhoven <h.duinhoven at planet.nl>
To: mgs at Autox.Team.Net 
Sent: Wednesday, May 2, 2012 1:16 PM
Subject: [Mgs]
Successor of MGTF?
http://www.carnewschina.com/2010/04/19/saic-working-on-new-mg-roadster-engine
-up-front/

Looks better than the previous gig.

Cheers,

Hans Duinhoven
71
BGT on the road again _______________________________________________
Mgs at autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Suggested annual
donation  $12.75
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums:
http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/d_dibiase at yahoo.com

From trijagparts at mindspring.com  Wed May  2 14:11:50 2012
From: trijagparts at mindspring.com (Brad Wilson)
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 15:11:50 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] =?utf-8?q?Successor_of_MGTF_=3F?=
In-Reply-To: <10B7BE23-95A5-4975-A8DB-D417250965C6@gmail.com>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<10B7BE23-95A5-4975-A8DB-D417250965C6@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <0d439459-2fb9-4804-9308-cf597de828ac@blur>

They have ruined it. Engine should be where it is now. As Porsche say  
evolution not revolution.
Brad


Connected by DROID on Verizon Wireless

-----Original message-----
From: Paul Root <ptrmgb at gmail.com>
To: Hans Duinhoven <h.duinhoven at planet.nl>
Cc: mgs at Autox.Team.Net
Sent: Wed, 02 May 2012, 18:57:08 GMT+00:00
Subject: Re: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?

Looks ok. Not great.

Autoweek gave the MG SUV thing at Bejing  the Best Concept award.

On May 2, 2012, at 12:16 PM, Hans Duinhoven wrote:

>
http://www.carnewschina.com/2010/04/19/saic-working-on-new-mg-roadster-engine 

-up-front/
>
> Looks better than the previous gig.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hans Duinhoven
> 71 BGT on the road again _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ptrmgb at gmail.com
_______________________________________________

Mgs at autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Suggested annual donation  $12.75
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe:  
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/trijagparts at mindspring.com

From strovato at optonline.net  Wed May  2 15:01:13 2012
From: strovato at optonline.net (Steven Trovato)
Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 17:01:13 -0400
Subject: [Mgs] Project for Barney ? ! ?
In-Reply-To: <201204280515.q3S5FOYn018052@nlpi129.prodigy.net>
References: <4F9B6AE3.4030200@justbrits.com>
	<201204280515.q3S5FOYn018052@nlpi129.prodigy.net>
Message-ID: <0M3E000RYYF4HH20@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>

I'm no accident reconstruction specialist, but I'm guessing that 
something fell on the car while it was parked.  At least that's what 
I'm going to keep telling myself.  I wonder if any of the heavy 
equipment in the background played a part in the incident.  As for 
parting it out, you really think you could get $2500 out of that?

-Steve Trovato
strovato at optonline.net

At 01:15 AM 4/28/2012, Barney Gaylord wrote:
>Obviously someone got killed in that one.  I'd like to see a video 
>of that accident, just to see what caused all the body damage.  It 
>looks like a mostly complete car.  Pity the frame is bent.  Would 
>make a nice kit car if you chuck the body.  If it was closer to home 
>I might turn it into $2500 in parts.

From chillmog at sbcglobal.net  Wed May  2 16:43:16 2012
From: chillmog at sbcglobal.net (Charles Hill)
Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 17:43:16 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Project for Barney ? ! ?
In-Reply-To: <0M3E000RYYF4HH20@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>
References: <4F9B6AE3.4030200@justbrits.com>
	<201204280515.q3S5FOYn018052@nlpi129.prodigy.net>
	<0M3E000RYYF4HH20@mta1.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>
Message-ID: <4FA1B884.8000106@sbcglobal.net>

A little like what Tim Taylor did to Jill's Chevy Nomad on Home 
Improvement?

Charles Hill

On 5/2/2012 4:01 PM, Steven Trovato wrote:
> I'm no accident reconstruction specialist, but I'm guessing that 
> something fell on the car while it was parked.  At least that's what 
> I'm going to keep telling myself.  I wonder if any of the heavy 
> equipment in the background played a part in the incident.  As for 
> parting it out, you really think you could get $2500 out of that?
>
> -Steve Trovato
> strovato at optonline.net
>
> At 01:15 AM 4/28/2012, Barney Gaylord wrote:
>> Obviously someone got killed in that one.  I'd like to see a video of 
>> that accident, just to see what caused all the body damage.  It looks 
>> like a mostly complete car.  Pity the frame is bent.  Would make a 
>> nice kit car if you chuck the body.  If it was closer to home I might 
>> turn it into $2500 in parts.

From mvheim at sonic.net  Wed May  2 17:30:56 2012
From: mvheim at sonic.net (Max Heim)
Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 16:30:56 -0700
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
Message-ID: <CBC711C0.39DF3%mvheim@sonic.net>

I wish they'd can the louvers between the headlights. I don't know why they
think that's part of the MG "face". We all know the radiator grill is
supposed to have vertical louvers.

Otherwise, not bad. Nice and compact, at any rate, if not unique.

--

Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires



on 5/2/12 10:16 AM, Hans Duinhoven at h.duinhoven at planet.nl wrote:

> http://www.carnewschina.com/2010/04/19/saic-working-on-new-mg-roadster-engine-
> up-front/
> 
> Looks better than the previous gig.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Hans Duinhoven
> 71 BGT on the road again 

From shop at justbrits.com  Wed May  2 18:50:09 2012
From: shop at justbrits.com (" Just Brits " Shop)
Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 19:50:09 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <CBC711C0.39DF3%mvheim@sonic.net>
References: <CBC711C0.39DF3%mvheim@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <4FA1D641.3070000@justbrits.com>

<< On 5/2/2012 6:30 PM, Max Heim wrote:

I wish they'd can the louvers between the headlights.>>

AGREED, Max.  Actually [to me at least<G>] they 'look like' tail/rear brake lites ?!?

<<   I don't know why they think that's part of the MG "face".

Their "Opinions" are "slanted" ? ! ?	<G>  !

<<   We all know the radiator grill is supposed to have vertical louvers.>>

But some DO have "mesh".  The License Plate (MG) location would be better served
IMHO, on a bracket mounted to bottom of 'air dam' with plate mounted upwards ? ! ?

<<   Otherwise, not bad. Nice and compact, at any rate, if not unique.>>

Butt seems to have some influence from BMW ? ! ? ! ?

Ed
Please visit MY site at:
www.justbrits.com

From david_breneman at yahoo.com  Wed May  2 20:03:54 2012
From: david_breneman at yahoo.com (David Breneman)
Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 19:03:54 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <4FA1D641.3070000@justbrits.com>
References: <CBC711C0.39DF3%mvheim@sonic.net> <4FA1D641.3070000@justbrits.com>
Message-ID: <1336010634.5470.YahooMailNeo@web112116.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

 
From: "" Just Brits " Shop" <shop at justbrits.com>
> On 5/2/2012 6:30 PM, Max
Heim wrote:
>>
>>   I don't know why they think that's part of the MG "face".
>>
> Their "Opinions" are "slanted" ? ! ?    <G>  !



Man, I hope this
comment isn't what it sounds like.

From barrie at look.ca  Wed May  2 20:21:39 2012
From: barrie at look.ca (Barrie Robinson)
Date: Wed, 02 May 2012 22:21:39 -0400
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <CBC711C0.39DF3%mvheim@sonic.net>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<CBC711C0.39DF3%mvheim@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <E1SPlgj-0000pE-IH@epsilon.look.ca>

Come on Max, that is as much an MG as Veyron is a Bugatti.  I feel 
like building a kit car and sticking a badge from the past on - there 
are several available.


At 07:30 PM 5/2/2012, Max Heim wrote:
>I wish they'd can the louvers between the headlights. I don't know why they
>think that's part of the MG "face". We all know the radiator grill is
>supposed to have vertical louvers.
>
>Otherwise, not bad. Nice and compact, at any rate, if not unique.
>
>--
>
>Max Heim
>'66 MGB GHN3L76149
>If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
>it's the primer red one with chrome wires
>
>
>
>on 5/2/12 10:16 AM, Hans Duinhoven at h.duinhoven at planet.nl wrote:
>
> > 
> http://www.carnewschina.com/2010/04/19/saic-working-on-new-mg-roadster-engine-
> > up-front/
> >
> > Looks better than the previous gig.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Hans Duinhoven
> > 71 BGT on the road again
>_______________________________________________
>
>Mgs at autox.team.net
>Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>Suggested annual donation  $12.75
>Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/barrie at look.ca

Regards

Barrie
barrie at look.ca
(705) 721-9060 

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Thu May  3 01:55:10 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Thu, 3 May 2012 08:55:10 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
Message-ID: <9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul>

I had trouble working out what was different to the previous MGF/TF until I 
looked at two side by side, the rear lights are exactly the same.  Skin-wise 
it's just a face-lift, which is odd considering the engineering changes 
underneath to move the engine from the middle to the front.  And I'd put 
money on it being FWD, like so much else, if that is indeed what has been 
done.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> http://www.carnewschina.com/2010/04/19/saic-working-on-new-mg-roadster-engine-up-front/

From ccrobins at ktc.com  Fri May  4 06:03:45 2012
From: ccrobins at ktc.com (Charley & Peggy Robinson)
Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 07:03:45 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul>
Message-ID: <4FA3C5A1.9020907@ktc.com>

Paul,

Are there many MG/TFs still running in the UK?

CR

On 5/3/2012 2:55 AM, PaulHunt73 wrote:
> I had trouble working out what was different to the previous MGF/TF 
> until I looked at two side by side, the rear lights are exactly the 
> same.  Skin-wise it's just a face-lift, which is odd considering the 
> engineering changes underneath to move the engine from the middle to 
> the front.  And I'd put money on it being FWD, like so much else, if 
> that is indeed what has been done.
>
> PaulH.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> http://www.carnewschina.com/2010/04/19/saic-working-on-new-mg-roadster-engine-up-front/ 
>>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ccrobins at ktc.com

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Fri May  4 06:38:38 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 13:38:38 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul> <4FA3C5A1.9020907@ktc.com>
Message-ID: <57B1C4C462FA423B97CD542E273A715E@paul>

MGF currently 21,000 taxed with another 8,000 registered as 'off road' from 
a peak of 38,000.
MG TF 22,000 taxed with another 3,000 off road from a peak of 26,000.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> Are there many MG/TFs still running in the UK?

From david_breneman at yahoo.com  Fri May  4 09:40:27 2012
From: david_breneman at yahoo.com (David Breneman)
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 08:40:27 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <57B1C4C462FA423B97CD542E273A715E@paul>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul> <4FA3C5A1.9020907@ktc.com>
	<57B1C4C462FA423B97CD542E273A715E@paul>
Message-ID: <1336146027.38226.YahooMailNeo@web112120.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

 From: PaulHunt73 <paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com>


> MGF currently 21,000 taxed
with another 8,000 registered as 'off road' 
> from a peak of 38,000.
> MG TF
22,000 taxed with another 3,000 off road from a peak of 26,000.


What does
"off road" mean?  Up on blocks, in storage, etc.?

In my neck of the woods, an
off road vehicle is one you take
stump jumpin'!  :-)

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Fri May  4 10:39:20 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 17:39:20 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul> <4FA3C5A1.9020907@ktc.com>
	<57B1C4C462FA423B97CD542E273A715E@paul>
	<1336146027.38226.YahooMailNeo@web112120.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <BEE976FE44EE4A05A2B242682B0836B3@paul>

Not an off-road vehicle, but a vehicle taken out of use.  In the UK we 
either tax and insure a car for a rolling 12 months, or we have to notify 
the authorities that it has been taken out of use - a Statutory Off Road 
Notification.  Particularly in the case of a restoration that may take some 
years you wouldn't want to tax (in the case of cars built after 1972) and 
insure a vehicle that wasn't going to be used for some time, and if you just 
stop taxing or insuring a vehicle without declaring SORN you get fined. 
However some people only tax their summer classic for the six months of 
summer, declaring SORN for the winter months, to reduce running costs. It's 
supposed to prevent people getting away without taxing, insuring or MOTing 
(annual safety check) their vehicle but in practice those sorts of people 
have vehicles that aren't even on the books anyway for various reasons, and 
it's generally law-abiding people that get caught out, either through a 
simple omission or something more sneaky.  Imagine you declare SORN and send 
your car away to be restored.  If the restorer trailers the car anywhere at 
any time, and one of the number plates is still on the car, it can be picked 
up by an Automatic Number Plate Recognition camera, and the owner gets fined 
for using a car on the road that he has declared as SORN.  Saying it was on 
a trailer at the time gets you nowhere.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
What does "off road" mean? Up on blocks, in storage, etc.?

From ccrobins at ktc.com  Fri May  4 11:44:21 2012
From: ccrobins at ktc.com (Charley & Peggy Robinson)
Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 12:44:21 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <1336146027.38226.YahooMailNeo@web112120.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul> <4FA3C5A1.9020907@ktc.com>
	<57B1C4C462FA423B97CD542E273A715E@paul>
	<1336146027.38226.YahooMailNeo@web112120.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4FA41575.6060302@ktc.com>

You beat me to that question!

CR

On 5/4/2012 10:40 AM, David Breneman wrote:
>   From: PaulHunt73<paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com>
>
>
>    
>> MGF currently 21,000 taxed with another 8,000 registered as 'off road'
>> from a peak of 38,000.
>> MG TF 22,000 taxed with another 3,000 off road from a peak of 26,000.
>>      
>
> What does "off road" mean?  Up on blocks, in storage, etc.?
>
> In my neck of the woods, an off road vehicle is one you take
> stump jumpin'!  :-)

From david_breneman at yahoo.com  Fri May  4 14:01:03 2012
From: david_breneman at yahoo.com (David Breneman)
Date: Fri, 4 May 2012 13:01:03 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <BEE976FE44EE4A05A2B242682B0836B3@paul>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul> <4FA3C5A1.9020907@ktc.com>
	<57B1C4C462FA423B97CD542E273A715E@paul>
	<1336146027.38226.YahooMailNeo@web112120.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BEE976FE44EE4A05A2B242682B0836B3@paul>
Message-ID: <1336161663.31348.YahooMailNeo@web112103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>

> Particularly in the case of a restoration that may take some 
> years you
wouldn't want to tax (in the case of cars built after 1972) and 
> insure a
vehicle that wasn't going to be used for some time, and if you just 
> stop
taxing or insuring a vehicle without declaring SORN you get fined.
Interesting.  Here (state of Washington, USA) you just don't renew
the license
tabs.  It stays in the state's computers for something
like 10 years.  When
you're ready to put it on the road you go in
to the County Auditor's office
and get new tabs.  If it's not in
the computer anymore, you have to present
the title or some other
physical proof of ownership. Tabs are renewed one year
at a time,
so there's no way to save anything for taking the car off the road
for anything less than a year.

>   If the restorer trailers the car anywhere
at any time, and one of the 
> number plates is still on the car, it can be
picked up by an Automatic Number 
> Plate Recognition camera, and the owner
gets fined for using a car on the road 
> that he has declared as SORN. 
Saying it was on a trailer at the time gets you 
> nowhere.

Now THERE'S a
scam our money-grubbers haven't thought of yet!  If
the car isn't traveling
under its own power, it doesn't need
current plates.  But you guys have a lot
more spy cameras than
we do.  I'm sure we're catching up, however.

From ccrobins at ktc.com  Fri May  4 14:24:40 2012
From: ccrobins at ktc.com (Charley & Peggy Robinson)
Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 15:24:40 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <BEE976FE44EE4A05A2B242682B0836B3@paul>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul> <4FA3C5A1.9020907@ktc.com>
	<57B1C4C462FA423B97CD542E273A715E@paul>
	<1336146027.38226.YahooMailNeo@web112120.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BEE976FE44EE4A05A2B242682B0836B3@paul>
Message-ID: <4FA43B08.3010008@ktc.com>

WOW!  That's awful.  In my case I just didn't renew the registration 
(windshield license sticker) when it came due in Oct. 2010.  Of course 
if I'd been caught on the road with an expired sticker it would have 
been a hefty fine.  Likewise the safety sticker.  We have to have our 
cars inspected annually as to lights, brakes, etc. We have to show proof 
that the car is insured as to liability in order to get these things done.

So after I put in the new brake MC and got everything else working, I 
had to add the car back to my auto insurance policy, re-register the car 
and then take it to an authorized inspection station to get the safety 
sticker.  Oh, I also had to sign a statement that I hadn't driven the 
car in the unregistered period and that there were no outstanding 
tickets on it.  I suppose that tickets business has to do with abandoned 
cars on the streets.

I suppose it boils down to much the same thing as in your country. Just 
different terminology. :-)

CR


On 5/4/2012 11:39 AM, PaulHunt73 wrote:
> Not an off-road vehicle, but a vehicle taken out of use.  In the UK we 
> either tax and insure a car for a rolling 12 months, or we have to 
> notify the authorities that it has been taken out of use - a Statutory 
> Off Road Notification.  Particularly in the case of a restoration that 
> may take some years you wouldn't want to tax (in the case of cars 
> built after 1972) and insure a vehicle that wasn't going to be used 
> for some time, and if you just stop taxing or insuring a vehicle 
> without declaring SORN you get fined. However some people only tax 
> their summer classic for the six months of summer, declaring SORN for 
> the winter months, to reduce running costs. It's supposed to prevent 
> people getting away without taxing, insuring or MOTing (annual safety 
> check) their vehicle but in practice those sorts of people have 
> vehicles that aren't even on the books anyway for various reasons, and 
> it's generally law-abiding people that get caught out, either through 
> a simple omission or something more sneaky.  Imagine you declare SORN 
> and send your car away to be restored.  If the restorer trailers the 
> car anywhere at any time, and one of the number plates is still on the 
> car, it can be picked up by an Automatic Number Plate Recognition 
> camera, and the owner gets fined for using a car on the road that he 
> has declared as SORN.  Saying it was on a trailer at the time gets you 
> nowhere.
>
> PaulH.
>
> ----- Original Message ----- What does "off road" mean? Up on blocks, 
> in storage, etc.?
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ccrobins at ktc.com

From lundgren at byu.net  Fri May  4 15:49:39 2012
From: lundgren at byu.net (Andrew B. Lundgren)
Date: Fri, 04 May 2012 15:49:39 -0600
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <1336161663.31348.YahooMailNeo@web112103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul> <4FA3C5A1.9020907@ktc.com>
	<57B1C4C462FA423B97CD542E273A715E@paul>
	<1336146027.38226.YahooMailNeo@web112120.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BEE976FE44EE4A05A2B242682B0836B3@paul>
	<1336161663.31348.YahooMailNeo@web112103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <4FA44EF3.2000308@byu.net>

I just moved from Colorado.  Not only do they want the money for when it 
wasn't on the road, they will charge you late fees for not paying the 
fees when they were due, even if you weren't using the vehicle.  (This 
includes the trailers...)



On 05/04/2012 02:01 PM, David Breneman wrote:
>
>   Tabs are renewed one year
> at a time,
> so there's no way to save anything for taking the car off the road
> for anything less than a year.

From ccrobins at ktc.com  Sat May  5 13:32:53 2012
From: ccrobins at ktc.com (Charley & Peggy Robinson)
Date: Sat, 05 May 2012 14:32:53 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <4FA44EF3.2000308@byu.net>
References: <C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE@uw471de61b465c>
	<9681894D1E8A46BF854C71BC6B5D7B90@paul> <4FA3C5A1.9020907@ktc.com>
	<57B1C4C462FA423B97CD542E273A715E@paul>
	<1336146027.38226.YahooMailNeo@web112120.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<BEE976FE44EE4A05A2B242682B0836B3@paul>
	<1336161663.31348.YahooMailNeo@web112103.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
	<4FA44EF3.2000308@byu.net>
Message-ID: <4FA58065.8060607@ktc.com>

Now that's a real bummer!  Where did you move to?  Oops, just noticed 
byu.net.  Utah?

CR

On 5/4/2012 4:49 PM, Andrew B. Lundgren wrote:
> I just moved from Colorado.  Not only do they want the money for when 
> it wasn't on the road, they will charge you late fees for not paying 
> the fees when they were due, even if you weren't using the vehicle.  
> (This includes the trailers...)
>
>
>
> On 05/04/2012 02:01 PM, David Breneman wrote:
>>
>>   Tabs are renewed one year
>> at a time,
>> so there's no way to save anything for taking the car off the road
>> for anything less than a year.
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ccrobins at ktc.com

From g.schnittke at comcast.net  Sat May  5 20:21:35 2012
From: g.schnittke at comcast.net (Glenn Schnittke)
Date: Sat, 05 May 2012 21:21:35 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
Message-ID: <4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net>

There's so much more that I want to say about it that I won't.

I will say that I think it's hideous. They took the front end of the 
MGF/TF, added the grille from the original bugeye Sprite and schlemmed 
them between headlights from a Japanese cartoon.

All other things considered, I can't see why anyone would be excited 
about this car, not knowing anything about its performance statistics or 
maintenance record.

And if something goes horribly wrong, who do you get to sue? The Chinese 
government? Good luck.

Okay, I admit. I went ahead and said it.

Glenn



On 5/2/2012 1:00 PM, mgs-request at autox.team.net wrote:
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 19:16:50 +0200
> From: "Hans Duinhoven"<h.duinhoven at planet.nl>
> To:<mgs at Autox.Team.Net>
> Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
> Message-ID:<C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE at uw471de61b465c>
> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
> 	reply-type=original
>
> http://www.carnewschina.com/2010/04/19/saic-working-on-new-mg-roadster-engine-up-front/
>
> Looks better than the previous gig.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Hans Duinhoven
> 71 BGT on the road again

From ccrobins at ktc.com  Sat May  5 21:01:44 2012
From: ccrobins at ktc.com (Charley & Peggy Robinson)
Date: Sat, 05 May 2012 22:01:44 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net>
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <4FA5E998.4070906@ktc.com>

What got me about the TF was that while it was reportedly a fine car, 
the doggoned thing looked like a Miata to me. :-(

CR

On 5/5/2012 9:21 PM, Glenn Schnittke wrote:
> There's so much more that I want to say about it that I won't.
>
> I will say that I think it's hideous. They took the front end of the 
> MGF/TF, added the grille from the original bugeye Sprite and schlemmed 
> them between headlights from a Japanese cartoon.
>
> All other things considered, I can't see why anyone would be excited 
> about this car, not knowing anything about its performance statistics 
> or maintenance record.
>
> And if something goes horribly wrong, who do you get to sue? The 
> Chinese government? Good luck.
>
> Okay, I admit. I went ahead and said it.
>
> Glenn
>
>
>
> On 5/2/2012 1:00 PM, mgs-request at autox.team.net wrote:
>> Message: 1
>> Date: Wed, 2 May 2012 19:16:50 +0200
>> From: "Hans Duinhoven"<h.duinhoven at planet.nl>
>> To:<mgs at Autox.Team.Net>
>> Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
>> Message-ID:<C6904EB75CF44BE89DA85E475D6245AE at uw471de61b465c>
>> Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1";
>>     reply-type=original
>>
>> http://www.carnewschina.com/2010/04/19/saic-working-on-new-mg-roadster-engine-up-front/ 
>>
>>
>> Looks better than the previous gig.
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Hans Duinhoven
>> 71 BGT on the road again
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ccrobins at ktc.com

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Sun May  6 04:09:48 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Sun, 6 May 2012 11:09:48 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net>
Message-ID: <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>

Well, if you bought it off the Chinese Government, then yes.  But otherwise, 
the importer or dealer that you bought it off, same as any other car made 
anywhere else.

As for the rest, this is so much like when MG/Rover produced the ZR/ZS/ZT, 
Austin/Rover the MG variants of the Metro/Maestro/Montego, MG the MGB, and 
so on back through history.  One thing that never changes is the refrain 
"It's not a proper MG ...".  Aside from the appearance let's wait and see 
what it is like before totally condemning it.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> And if something goes horribly wrong, who do you get to sue? The Chinese 
> government? Good luck.

From ccrobins at ktc.com  Sun May  6 08:21:40 2012
From: ccrobins at ktc.com (Charley & Peggy Robinson)
Date: Sun, 06 May 2012 09:21:40 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net> <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
Message-ID: <4FA688F4.7070607@ktc.com>

I did a little research.  Apparently the  version of the TF was 
assembled from CKDs  in the UK at Longbridge.  At least some British 
factory workers had some income from the deal.  Too bad it didn't sell well.

CR

On 5/6/2012 5:09 AM, PaulHunt73 wrote:
> Well, if you bought it off the Chinese Government, then yes.  But 
> otherwise, the importer or dealer that you bought it off, same as any 
> other car made anywhere else.
>
> As for the rest, this is so much like when MG/Rover produced the 
> ZR/ZS/ZT, Austin/Rover the MG variants of the Metro/Maestro/Montego, 
> MG the MGB, and so on back through history.  One thing that never 
> changes is the refrain "It's not a proper MG ...".  Aside from the 
> appearance let's wait and see what it is like before totally 
> condemning it.
>
> PaulH.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> And if something goes horribly wrong, who do you get to sue? The 
>> Chinese government? Good luck.
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ccrobins at ktc.com

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Sun May  6 08:57:27 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Sun, 6 May 2012 15:57:27 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net> <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
	<4FA688F4.7070607@ktc.com>
Message-ID: <CA8DCECB883342D587A0F44198F4BD0F@paul>

The MG TF was originally produced in 2002 by MG Rover, entirely at 
Longbridge.  After they went bust in 2005 there was a gap until Nanjing 
started making them again in 2008.  It is these that were assembled from 
CKDs at Longbridge, albeit only 908 out of the total of 26,000.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
>I did a little research.  Apparently the  version of the TF was assembled 
>from CKDs  in the UK at Longbridge. 

From arundell at ghs.com.au  Sun May  6 16:40:04 2012
From: arundell at ghs.com.au (Murray Arundell)
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 08:40:04 +1000
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net> <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
Message-ID: <681E274A-8C00-4664-B1B5-CBCE0248475D@ghs.com.au>

...and suing the US UK or any other government would be any easier? Oh please,
can you guys put aside these petty prejudices for a second and simply judge
something on its merits? This China bashing is becoming tedious. Spend less
time bemoaning their success, and more time thinking about what they are doing
right and we are doing wrong...

Murray Arundell

Sent from my iPhone

On 06/05/2012, at 8:09 PM, "PaulHunt73" <paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com> wrote:

> Well, if you bought it off the Chinese Government, then yes.  But otherwise,
the importer or dealer that you bought it off, same as any other car made
anywhere else.
>
> As for the rest, this is so much like when MG/Rover produced the ZR/ZS/ZT,
Austin/Rover the MG variants of the Metro/Maestro/Montego, MG the MGB, and so
on back through history.  One thing that never changes is the refrain "It's
not a proper MG ...".  Aside from the appearance let's wait and see what it is
like before totally condemning it.
>
> PaulH.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> And if something goes horribly wrong, who do you get to sue? The Chinese
government? Good luck.
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/arundell at ghs.com.au

From trijagparts at mindspring.com  Sun May  6 20:47:13 2012
From: trijagparts at mindspring.com (Brad Wilson)
Date: Sun, 06 May 2012 21:47:13 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <681E274A-8C00-4664-B1B5-CBCE0248475D@ghs.com.au>
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net> <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
	<681E274A-8C00-4664-B1B5-CBCE0248475D@ghs.com.au>
Message-ID: <mailman.1462.1336358805.29715.mgs@autox.team.net>

At 05:40 PM 06/05/2012, you wrote:
>...and suing the US UK or any other government would be any easier? Oh please,
>can you guys put aside these petty prejudices for a second and simply judge
>something on its merits? This China bashing is becoming tedious. Spend less
>time bemoaning their success, and more time thinking about what they are doing
>right and we are doing wrong...
>
>Murray Arundell

Murray et al:

As a fellow commonwealth citizen I can see your point about the yanks 
China bashing, but I really feel that if they make the car front 
engine, front wheel drive that will be a huge retrograde step and a 
mistake.  As for the styling, if they keep the current drive train 
configuration, I don't think it is all that bad, so go for it!

Regards,

Brad

From arundell at ghs.com.au  Sun May  6 23:19:29 2012
From: arundell at ghs.com.au (Murray Arundell)
Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 15:19:29 +1000
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <681E274A-8C00-4664-B1B5-CBCE0248475D@ghs.com.au>
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net> <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
	<681E274A-8C00-4664-B1B5-CBCE0248475D@ghs.com.au>
Message-ID: <4A9F5CEF-D32C-4F38-B780-95FCFB0A32C2@ghs.com.au>

Brad, I agree 100% mate...

Murray

Sent from my iPhone

On 07/05/2012, at 12:47 PM, Brad Wilson <trijagparts at mindspring.com> wrote:

> At 05:40 PM 06/05/2012, you wrote:
>> ...and suing the US UK or any other government would be any easier? Oh
please,
>> can you guys put aside these petty prejudices for a second and simply
judge
>> something on its merits? This China bashing is becoming tedious. Spend
less
>> time bemoaning their success, and more time thinking about what they are
doing
>> right and we are doing wrong...
>>
>> Murray Arundell
>
> Murray et al:
>
> As a fellow commonwealth citizen I can see your point about the yanks China
bashing, but I really feel that if they make the car front engine, front wheel
drive that will be a huge retrograde step and a mistake.  As for the styling,
if they keep the current drive train configuration, I don't think it is all
that bad, so go for it!
>
> Regards,
>
> Brad

From mvheim at sonic.net  Mon May  7 10:49:28 2012
From: mvheim at sonic.net (Max Heim)
Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 09:49:28 -0700
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <4FA44EF3.2000308@byu.net>
Message-ID: <CBCD4B28.39F39%mvheim@sonic.net>

California is similar. You need to register it "non-operational" or you'll
pay later. Basically the same as the British system.


--

Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires



on 5/4/12 2:49 PM, Andrew B. Lundgren at lundgren at byu.net wrote:

> I just moved from Colorado.  Not only do they want the money for when it
> wasn't on the road, they will charge you late fees for not paying the
> fees when they were due, even if you weren't using the vehicle.  (This
> includes the trailers...)
> 
> 
> 
> On 05/04/2012 02:01 PM, David Breneman wrote:
>> 
>>   Tabs are renewed one year
>> at a time,
>> so there's no way to save anything for taking the car off the road
>> for anything less than a year.

From lundgren at byu.net  Mon May  7 13:22:42 2012
From: lundgren at byu.net (Andrew B. Lundgren)
Date: Mon, 07 May 2012 13:22:42 -0600
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <CBCD4B28.39F39%mvheim@sonic.net>
References: <CBCD4B28.39F39%mvheim@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <4FA82102.3040409@byu.net>

I considered selling my trailer to my wife to renew the license on my 
trailer.   We moved out of state though, so they didn't get to collect 3 
years of plates and fees from us.


On 05/07/2012 10:49 AM, Max Heim wrote:
> California is similar. You need to register it "non-operational" or you'll
> pay later. Basically the same as the British system.
>
>
> --
>
> Max Heim
> '66 MGB GHN3L76149
> If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
> it's the primer red one with chrome wires
>
>
>
> on 5/4/12 2:49 PM, Andrew B. Lundgren at lundgren at byu.net wrote:
>
>> I just moved from Colorado.  Not only do they want the money for when it
>> wasn't on the road, they will charge you late fees for not paying the
>> fees when they were due, even if you weren't using the vehicle.  (This
>> includes the trailers...)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 05/04/2012 02:01 PM, David Breneman wrote:
>>>    Tabs are renewed one year
>>> at a time,
>>> so there's no way to save anything for taking the car off the road
>>> for anything less than a year.
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/lundgren at byu.net

From ccrobins at ktc.com  Tue May  8 07:19:09 2012
From: ccrobins at ktc.com (Charley & Peggy Robinson)
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 08:19:09 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <CA8DCECB883342D587A0F44198F4BD0F@paul>
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net> <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
	<4FA688F4.7070607@ktc.com> <CA8DCECB883342D587A0F44198F4BD0F@paul>
Message-ID: <4FA91D4D.1090201@ktc.com>

What I read was the MG F was produced by the Rover group.  The TF was 
assembled from Chinese-built  Complete Knock Down Kits  (CKD)  in the 
UK.  They were not the same cars.

CR

On 5/6/2012 9:57 AM, PaulHunt73 wrote:
> The MG TF was originally produced in 2002 by MG Rover, entirely at 
> Longbridge.  After they went bust in 2005 there was a gap until 
> Nanjing started making them again in 2008.  It is these that were 
> assembled from CKDs at Longbridge, albeit only 908 out of the total of 
> 26,000.
>
> PaulH.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> I did a little research.  Apparently the  version of the TF was 
>> assembled from CKDs  in the UK at Longbridge. 
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ccrobins at ktc.com

From ccrobins at ktc.com  Tue May  8 07:22:16 2012
From: ccrobins at ktc.com (Charley & Peggy Robinson)
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 08:22:16 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <681E274A-8C00-4664-B1B5-CBCE0248475D@ghs.com.au>
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net> <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
	<681E274A-8C00-4664-B1B5-CBCE0248475D@ghs.com.au>
Message-ID: <4FA91E08.50909@ktc.com>

Who is "we" ?  :-)

CR

On 5/6/2012 5:40 PM, Murray Arundell wrote:
> ...and suing the US UK or any other government would be any easier? Oh please,
> can you guys put aside these petty prejudices for a second and simply judge
> something on its merits? This China bashing is becoming tedious. Spend less
> time bemoaning their success, and more time thinking about what they are doing
> right and we are doing wrong...
>
> Murray Arundell
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On 06/05/2012, at 8:09 PM, "PaulHunt73"<paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com>  wrote:
>
>    
>> Well, if you bought it off the Chinese Government, then yes.  But otherwise,
>>      
> the importer or dealer that you bought it off, same as any other car made
> anywhere else.
>    
>> As for the rest, this is so much like when MG/Rover produced the ZR/ZS/ZT,
>>      
> Austin/Rover the MG variants of the Metro/Maestro/Montego, MG the MGB, and so
> on back through history.  One thing that never changes is the refrain "It's
> not a proper MG ...".  Aside from the appearance let's wait and see what it is
> like before totally condemning it.
>    
>> PaulH.
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>>      
>>> And if something goes horribly wrong, who do you get to sue? The Chinese
>>>        
> government? Good luck.
>    
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Mgs at autox.team.net
>> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
>> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
>> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
>> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
>> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/arundell at ghs.com.au
>>      
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ccrobins at ktc.com

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Tue May  8 08:54:11 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Tue, 8 May 2012 15:54:11 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net> <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
	<4FA688F4.7070607@ktc.com> <CA8DCECB883342D587A0F44198F4BD0F@paul>
	<4FA91D4D.1090201@ktc.com>
Message-ID: <A773219902B14ADE998616AB84137762@paul>

Well, that isn't correct.

The MGF was produced by Rover Group from 1995 while it was owned by BMW.  MG 
Rover was formed after the sale of the marque by BMW to the Phoenix Group in 
2000, and they continued to produce the MGF.  It became the TF from 2002 
until 2005 when MG Rover collapsed.  The TF was based on the MGF but had 
re-engineered suspension and engines, both MGF and TF up to this time were 
entirely assembled at Longbridge.  Nanjing bought the name in 2007 and in 
2008 started producing the TF again with very few changes, this was the CKD 
kit only finally assembled at Longbridge.  There was a much bigger 
difference between the Rover Group/MG Rover MGF and the MG Rover TF than 
there was between the MG Rover TF and the Nanjing TF.  The Chinese TF was 
almost exactly the same as the MG Rover TF.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> What I read was the MG F was produced by the Rover group.  The TF was 
> assembled from Chinese-built  Complete Knock Down Kits  (CKD)  in the UK. 
> They were not the same cars.

From ccrobins at ktc.com  Tue May  8 16:25:14 2012
From: ccrobins at ktc.com (Charley & Peggy Robinson)
Date: Tue, 08 May 2012 17:25:14 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Successor of MGTF?
In-Reply-To: <A773219902B14ADE998616AB84137762@paul>
References: <mailman.11.1335981602.390.mgs@autox.team.net>
	<4FA5E02F.3090601@comcast.net> <54659DF5A5CE4332B954C5F1D589C5F9@paul>
	<4FA688F4.7070607@ktc.com> <CA8DCECB883342D587A0F44198F4BD0F@paul>
	<4FA91D4D.1090201@ktc.com> <A773219902B14ADE998616AB84137762@paul>
Message-ID: <4FA99D4A.4060107@ktc.com>

OK, I'll take your word for it.  You're the guy on the spot with an 
encyclopedic knowledge of MG stuff.

CR

On 5/8/2012 9:54 AM, PaulHunt73 wrote:
> Well, that isn't correct.
>
> The MGF was produced by Rover Group from 1995 while it was owned by 
> BMW.  MG Rover was formed after the sale of the marque by BMW to the 
> Phoenix Group in 2000, and they continued to produce the MGF.  It 
> became the TF from 2002 until 2005 when MG Rover collapsed.  The TF 
> was based on the MGF but had re-engineered suspension and engines, 
> both MGF and TF up to this time were entirely assembled at 
> Longbridge.  Nanjing bought the name in 2007 and in 2008 started 
> producing the TF again with very few changes, this was the CKD kit 
> only finally assembled at Longbridge.  There was a much bigger 
> difference between the Rover Group/MG Rover MGF and the MG Rover TF 
> than there was between the MG Rover TF and the Nanjing TF.  The 
> Chinese TF was almost exactly the same as the MG Rover TF.
>
> PaulH.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>> What I read was the MG F was produced by the Rover group.  The TF was 
>> assembled from Chinese-built  Complete Knock Down Kits  (CKD)  in the 
>> UK. They were not the same cars.
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ccrobins at ktc.com

From steve at shoyer.com  Tue May  8 23:50:30 2012
From: steve at shoyer.com (Steve Shoyer)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 01:50:30 -0400
Subject: [Mgs] Can't remove clutch slave components
Message-ID: <2CA312BA0390476CB037CD0B8A864F73@SteveLenovo>

I'm trying to replace my clutch slave cylinder, as well as the hose leading
to it, but I can't loosen the fitting on the pipe that connects to the
clutch hose.  I'm afraid of breaking the pipe if I use too much force on the
wrench.  I sprayed the area with B'laster, which hasn't made any difference
yet.
 
On top of that, the clevis pin that holds the push rod to the clutch lever
is rusted in place and won't budge either.
 
I would use a torch to heat them both up, but it doesn't look like the
safest idea, mainly because everything in the area is covered by oil or
underbody sealer.
 
Does anyone have any tips how to get the old parts loose?  Thanks.
 
--Steve Shoyer   1980 MGB

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Wed May  9 04:48:39 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 11:48:39 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Can't remove clutch slave components
References: <2CA312BA0390476CB037CD0B8A864F73@SteveLenovo>
Message-ID: <BA26BA4E196D4160B04702B4297D3062@paul>

It's a beggar unless you take the engine out!  Removing the starter might 
give you more access.  Failing that I'd cut the hose off then grind the 
fitting off from the bottom of the bracket which should allow you to lift 
the top part of the fitting away from the bracket and pull it down a bit to 
give better access to the two parts that are normally above the bracket. 
Worst case scenario is that you have to replace the pipe from master to 
bracket as well.  If you give up on the hose and just replace the slave you 
will probably find that with the slave screwed onto the hose the slave 
brackets no longer line up with the bell-housing as the thread start is 
almost certainly in a different place.  I was lucky, an additional copper 
washer lined it up again, you don't want to bolt it on with the hose 
twisted.  What was really annoying is that I'd only just put the engine back 
after a clutch change, only then finding that the slave had started leaking.

You may not need to remove the clevis pin, the push-rod coming out of the 
rubber boot simply sits in an indentation in the outer face of the piston, 
it's not attached.  You should be able to get away with using the old 
push-rod as long as it is the same length as the new.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> I'm trying to replace my clutch slave cylinder, as well as the hose 
> leading
> to it, but I can't loosen the fitting on the pipe that connects to the
> clutch hose.  I'm afraid of breaking the pipe if I use too much force on 
> the
> wrench.  I sprayed the area with B'laster, which hasn't made any 
> difference
> yet.

From otis15 at aol.com  Wed May  9 05:08:53 2012
From: otis15 at aol.com (otis15 at aol.com)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 07:08:53 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: [Mgs] Can't remove clutch slave components
In-Reply-To: <2CA312BA0390476CB037CD0B8A864F73@SteveLenovo>
References: <2CA312BA0390476CB037CD0B8A864F73@SteveLenovo>
Message-ID: <8CEFBEB40CFEBE2-F4-F6BD@webmail-m039.sysops.aol.com>

Had the same problem. Used a wire wheel on a 3/8 drill to clean the connection
fitting then a few min. with pb blaster and it came right off.
????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Steve




-----Original Message-----
From: Steve Shoyer &lt;steve at shoyer.com&gt;
To: mgs &lt;mgs at autox.team.net&gt;
Sent: Wed, May 9, 2012 3:35 am
Subject: [Mgs] Can't remove clutch slave components




I'm trying to replace my clutch slave cylinder, as well as the hose leading
to it, but I can't loosen the fitting on the pipe that connects to the
clutch hose.  I'm afraid of breaking the pipe if I use too much force on the
wrench.  I sprayed the area with B'laster, which hasn't made any difference
yet.

On top of that, the clevis pin that holds the push rod to the clutch lever
is rusted in place and won't budge either.

I would use a torch to heat them both up, but it doesn't look like the
safest idea, mainly because everything in the area is covered by oil or
underbody sealer.

Does anyone have any tips how to get the old parts loose?  Thanks.

--Steve Shoyer   1980 MGB
_______________________________________________

Mgs at autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Suggested annual donation  $12.75
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/otis15 at aol.com

From rpschauss at gmail.com  Wed May  9 13:18:30 2012
From: rpschauss at gmail.com (Peter Schauss)
Date: Wed, 9 May 2012 15:18:30 -0400
Subject: [Mgs] Replacing the left front motor mount/ removing the steering
 rack
Message-ID: <CAC8_WWPtdFXaqAVLZyjngkcP07V8DOb4vLae10kxaMShkXm0kQ@mail.gmail.com>

I have had my MGB (1980) back together for a couple of weeks now so I
thought it would be appropriate to report how it all worked out.

-  I had to remove the lower radiator hose, but not the radiator
itself, in order to remove the steering rack.

-  I removed the rack by removing the four steering arm bolts and the
four bolts which old it to the front subframe.  It appears that the
nuts on the latter bolts are supposed to be captive, welded to the
subframe.  In my case two of them were not which made the removal
process a bit more complicated since it was difficult to get a wrench
on them.  One of the

- As one of you suggested, the pinch bolt needs to be removed
compleletly since it sits in a notch on the steering rack shaft.

- With the steering rack out of the way, attaching the left motor
mount was easy.

- The main problem that I had replacing the steering rack, was getting
the notch on the shaft to line up with the pinch bolt hole on the
u-joint.  Even though I had the shaft marked getting all of the parts
to hold still was difficult.  Even if the two parts are only off by
one spline, the pinch bolt will not go through.  An extra set of hands
here would have been helpfull.  The positive thing here, is that the
steering rack shaft and the u-joint can only go together one way.

- Once I got the steering rack shaft and the u-joint lined up and the
pinch bolt in place, I found that the holes on the rack did not line
up with the corresponding holes on the front subframe,  They were off
by about half the diameter of the bolts.  I found that when I pushed
hard on the rack, something further up the chain slipped back and then
everything lined up.  The steering is firm, so I assume that I have
not damaged anything.

Thanks for all of the advice.

Peter Schauss
1980 MGB

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Thu May 10 03:11:18 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 10:11:18 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Replacing the left front motor mount/ removing the
 steering rack
References: <CAC8_WWPtdFXaqAVLZyjngkcP07V8DOb4vLae10kxaMShkXm0kQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <2C47B863D4C14C49B2B8A5CB3A39131F@paul>

Sounds like your column shear pins may have sheared, which allows the lower 
end to move towards the rack under spring pressure.  It's not an issue, just 
makes things a bit difficult for reassembly as you found.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> - Once I got the steering rack shaft and the u-joint lined up and the
> pinch bolt in place, I found that the holes on the rack did not line
> up with the corresponding holes on the front subframe,  They were off
> by about half the diameter of the bolts.  I found that when I pushed
> hard on the rack, something further up the chain slipped back and then
> everything lined up.  The steering is firm, so I assume that I have
> not damaged anything.

From d_dibiase at yahoo.com  Thu May 10 06:02:20 2012
From: d_dibiase at yahoo.com (Dan DiBiase)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 05:02:20 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Mgs] Replacing the left front motor mount/ removing the
 steering rack
In-Reply-To: <CAC8_WWPtdFXaqAVLZyjngkcP07V8DOb4vLae10kxaMShkXm0kQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAC8_WWPtdFXaqAVLZyjngkcP07V8DOb4vLae10kxaMShkXm0kQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1336651340.88935.YahooMailNeo@web39401.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

Glad you were able to work it all out, Peter....

Dan D
'65B, '76B
Central NJ
USA



________________________________
 From: Peter Schauss
<rpschauss at gmail.com>
To: mgs at autox.team.net 
Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2012
3:18 PM
Subject: [Mgs] Replacing the left front motor mount/ removing the
steering rack
 
I have had my MGB (1980) back together for a couple of weeks
now so I
thought it would be appropriate to report how it all worked out.

- 
I had to remove the lower radiator hose, but not the radiator
itself, in order
to remove the steering rack.

-  I removed the rack by removing the four
steering arm bolts and the
four bolts which old it to the front subframe.  It
appears that the
nuts on the latter bolts are supposed to be captive, welded
to the
subframe.  In my case two of them were not which made the removal
process a bit more complicated since it was difficult to get a wrench
on
them.  One of the

- As one of you suggested, the pinch bolt needs to be
removed
compleletly since it sits in a notch on the steering rack shaft.

-
With the steering rack out of the way, attaching the left motor
mount was
easy.

- The main problem that I had replacing the steering rack, was getting
the notch on the shaft to line up with the pinch bolt hole on the
u-joint. 
Even though I had the shaft marked getting all of the parts
to hold still was
difficult.  Even if the two parts are only off by
one spline, the pinch bolt
will not go through.  An extra set of hands
here would have been helpfull. 
The positive thing here, is that the
steering rack shaft and the u-joint can
only go together one way.

- Once I got the steering rack shaft and the
u-joint lined up and the
pinch bolt in place, I found that the holes on the
rack did not line
up with the corresponding holes on the front subframe,  They
were off
by about half the diameter of the bolts.  I found that when I pushed
hard on the rack, something further up the chain slipped back and then
everything lined up.  The steering is firm, so I assume that I have
not
damaged anything.

Thanks for all of the advice.

Peter Schauss
1980 MGB
_______________________________________________

Mgs at autox.team.net
Donate:
http://www.team.net/donate.html
Suggested annual donation  $12.75
Archive:
http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/d_dibiase at yahoo.com

From steve at shoyer.com  Thu May 10 08:41:13 2012
From: steve at shoyer.com (Steve Shoyer)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 10:41:13 -0400
Subject: [Mgs] Can't remove clutch slave components
In-Reply-To: <BA26BA4E196D4160B04702B4297D3062@paul>
References: <2CA312BA0390476CB037CD0B8A864F73@SteveLenovo>
	<BA26BA4E196D4160B04702B4297D3062@paul>
Message-ID: <6E1E41A2BBC24DE79D5838A070B3B2E6@SteveLenovo>

Thanks to everyone who responded on the list and offline.  I was finally
able to get the pipe disconnected from the hose without breaking the pipe,
so it looks like I don't need to pull the engine for this job - yet, anyway.
The new push rod is longer than the old one, so I still need to remove the
clevis pin, but there's more clearance to get to it so I hope it won't be
too much of an ordeal.

--Steve (1980 MGB)

----- Original Message ----- 
> I'm trying to replace my clutch slave cylinder, as well as the hose 
> leading to it, but I can't loosen the fitting on the pipe that 
> connects to the clutch hose...

From guinness at stclegal.com  Thu May 10 13:39:43 2012
From: guinness at stclegal.com (Robert J. Guinness)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 14:39:43 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] MGA Inner Tie Rod Adjustment
Message-ID: <4FAC197F.7010909@stclegal.com>

I have a 1960 MGA.  I am working on the front suspension.  After 
removing the tie rod ends, I held the inner tie rods horizontal and let 
go, they fell straight down with no resistance.  I thought there should 
be some resistance to them and that they should basically hold 
horizontal (but with free motion all around when moved by hand).  Is 
this correct.  If not how do I go about adjusting them.  Is it a 
"simple" tightening of the acorn nut like an MGB, or is it more 
involved.  The ball joint connection to the rack certainly looks a 
little different than an MGB.
-- 
Robert Guinness

From h.duinhoven at planet.nl  Thu May 10 14:41:23 2012
From: h.duinhoven at planet.nl (Hans Duinhoven)
Date: Thu, 10 May 2012 22:41:23 +0200
Subject: [Mgs] Dutch car magazine Autoweek celebrates 50 years of MGB
Message-ID: <40F8E843549149429D4184935EA95560@uw471de61b465c>

http://www.autoweek.nl/video/2869/video-classic-mgb-50-jaar 
Enjoy this nice movie.
No subtitles though...

Please look at one of the only 7 made original LHD V8 BGT's.


Cheers,

Hans
71 BGT

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Fri May 11 01:43:56 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 08:43:56 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] MGA Inner Tie Rod Adjustment
References: <4FAC197F.7010909@stclegal.com>
Message-ID: <3F6540C10BB046ADBA4AB7A92414FFEE@paul>

There should be a resistance for the MGB at least, to ensure no free play - 
32 to 52 pound *inches* on the rod to produce articulation.  The 
ball housing is adjusted to produce this, the 'locknut' flange has to be 
prised out of the indentations on the housing to allow it.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> ...  I thought there should
> be some resistance to them and that they should basically hold
> horizontal (but with free motion all around when moved by hand).  Is
> this correct.  If not how do I go about adjusting them.  Is it a
> "simple" tightening of the acorn nut like an MGB, or is it more
> involved.  The ball joint connection to the rack certainly looks a
> little different than an MGB.

From barneymg at mgaguru.com  Fri May 11 10:56:23 2012
From: barneymg at mgaguru.com (Barney Gaylord)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 11:56:23 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] MGA Inner Tie Rod Adjustment
In-Reply-To: <3F6540C10BB046ADBA4AB7A92414FFEE@paul>
References: <4FAC197F.7010909@stclegal.com>
	<3F6540C10BB046ADBA4AB7A92414FFEE@paul>
Message-ID: <201205111801.q4BI1cIM004103@nlpi129.prodigy.net>

Not so on the MGA.  The MGA has no preload spring.  It has shims to 
adjust minimal clearance.  If you manage to adjust it to have a bit 
of drag initially, it will wear in and become loose in short order 
anyway.  So being loose is normal for MGA.

If it is loose enough to wiggle endways you can (maybe) disassemble 
the acorn nut and remove a thin shim to reduce internal 
clearance.  Beware that this joint is often very difficult to 
unscrew, and the shims are usually aluminum. This may be why it is so 
difficult to open, due to galvanic corrosion of dissimilar 
metals.  If you apply heat it will most likely destroy the aluminum 
shims.  See here:
http://mgaguru.com/mgtech/steering/sr201.htm
http://mgaguru.com/mgtech/steering/sr202.htm
http://mgaguru.com/mgtech/tools/18G312.htm

Barney Gaylord
1958 MGA with an attitude
http://MGAguru.com


At 08:43 AM 5/11/2012 +0100, PaulHunt73 wrote:
>There should be a resistance for the MGB at least, to ensure no free 
>play - 32 to 52 pound *inches* on the rod to produce 
>articulation.  The ball housing is adjusted to produce this, the 
>'locknut' flange has to be prised out of the indentations on the 
>housing to allow it.
>....


>----- Original Message -----
>>...  I thought there should be some resistance to them and that 
>>they should basically hold horizontal (but with free motion all 
>>around when moved by hand).  Is this correct.  If not how do I go 
>>about adjusting them.  Is it a "simple" tightening of the acorn nut 
>>like an MGB, or is it more involved.  The ball joint connection to 
>>the rack certainly looks a little different than an MGB.

From ccrobins at ktc.com  Fri May 11 13:56:13 2012
From: ccrobins at ktc.com (Charley & Peggy Robinson)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:56:13 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Can't remove clutch slave components
In-Reply-To: <6E1E41A2BBC24DE79D5838A070B3B2E6@SteveLenovo>
References: <2CA312BA0390476CB037CD0B8A864F73@SteveLenovo>
	<BA26BA4E196D4160B04702B4297D3062@paul>
	<6E1E41A2BBC24DE79D5838A070B3B2E6@SteveLenovo>
Message-ID: <4FAD6EDD.5050301@ktc.com>

Are you sure you have the right parts?

CR

On 5/10/2012 9:41 AM, Steve Shoyer wrote:
> The new push rod is longer than the old one, so I still need to remove the
> clevis pin,
>
> --Steve (1980 MGB)
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>    
>> I'm trying to replace my clutch slave cylinder, as well as the hose
>> leading to it, but I can't loosen the fitting on the pipe that
>> connects to the clutch hose...
>>      
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe: http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/ccrobins at ktc.com

From lundgren at byu.net  Fri May 11 14:52:38 2012
From: lundgren at byu.net (Andrew B. Lundgren)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 14:52:38 -0600
Subject: [Mgs] How to "align" the steering wheel?
Message-ID: <4FAD7C16.5000106@byu.net>

I have a '70 B.

As long as I have had the car, you have to hold the wheel at about 5 
degrees to the right to go straight.  I had the front end aligned a 
while back, and I don't think it is out.

My turn signal auto cancel is also impacted by the wheel not pointing 
straight when the car is going straight.

How do you align the steering wheel so that when you hold it straight, 
the car goes straight?

Thanks!

--
Andrew

From mvheim at sonic.net  Fri May 11 17:36:37 2012
From: mvheim at sonic.net (Max Heim)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 16:36:37 -0700
Subject: [Mgs] How to "align" the steering wheel?
In-Reply-To: <4FAD7C16.5000106@byu.net>
Message-ID: <CBD2F095.3A28D%mvheim@sonic.net>

If it was just the steering wheel, I would remove the horn button, remove
the big nut, pull the wheel and reset it on the splines. But this won't
change the turn signal behavior -- the autocancel boss is on the steering
column shaft somewhere. This fact should tell you that the shaft is not
centered. Which might well mean that the alignment shop has one tie rod set
longer than the other (it's hard to make them give a hoot when it is
tracking straight regardless -- the real trick is to get it tracking
straight WITH THE WHEEL CENTERED, but they often don't want to believe
this). Can you compare your turning radius, righthand versus lefthand?

--

Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires

PS: My signals have never autocancelled, so I recenter the wheel all the
time...


on 5/11/12 1:52 PM, Andrew B. Lundgren at lundgren at byu.net wrote:

> I have a '70 B.
> 
> As long as I have had the car, you have to hold the wheel at about 5
> degrees to the right to go straight.  I had the front end aligned a
> while back, and I don't think it is out.
> 
> My turn signal auto cancel is also impacted by the wheel not pointing
> straight when the car is going straight.
> 
> How do you align the steering wheel so that when you hold it straight,
> the car goes straight?
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> --
> Andrew

From richard.ewald at gmail.com  Fri May 11 22:00:23 2012
From: richard.ewald at gmail.com (Richard Ewald)
Date: Fri, 11 May 2012 21:00:23 -0700
Subject: [Mgs] Fwd:  How to "align" the steering wheel?
In-Reply-To: <CACOF-TpfPS5_MPNfSWpoOLnnCMCAELicZNUzDRiD0PtjYeahig@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4FAD7C16.5000106@byu.net> <CBD2F095.3A28D%mvheim@sonic.net>
	<CACOF-TpfPS5_MPNfSWpoOLnnCMCAELicZNUzDRiD0PtjYeahig@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <CACOF-TpSdC41k9f8aFLC-BYNF4_reGDHXOZS+3nbUEsOM3Ei9g@mail.gmail.com>

It's late, I hit reply and just sent this to Max not the list.
DOH!

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Richard Ewald <richard.ewald at gmail.com>
Date: Fri, May 11, 2012 at 8:59 PM
Subject: Re: [Mgs] How to "align" the steering wheel?
To: Max Heim <mvheim at sonic.net>


On a B the only adjustment is front toe.  The problem is if the alignment
shop just mounts the front heads, and does a set the toe and go alignment
there is an excellent chance the steering wheel won't be straight and the
car will not track straight (it might drive straight, but the rear tires
won't roll over the exact same piece of ground as the fronts, they will be
offset just a bit.
The reason for this is the rear axle is a bit off.  Over the years the axle
has shifted so one side is further forward than the other side.  This gives
a toe in condition on one side and a toe out condition on the other side.
In essence you B now has rear wheel steer.
What needs to be done is have the alignment shop mount the rear heads and
measure the thrust line and adjust from there.If the thrust line is just a
bit off, they can adjust the front to compensate, if it is way off, you
might have to mess with the axle to spring mounts, or look at the spring
mounts.  I have loosened up axle to spring mounts on both sides, massaged
both side with a hammer and re-tightened to bring a thrust line under
control.
All of the above presumes that the camber or one of the other angles is not
off on your car.
If you are in Southern California, I would be more than happy to toss it up
on my alignment rack at work.
Rick


On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Max Heim <mvheim at sonic.net> wrote:

> If it was just the steering wheel, I would remove the horn button, remove
> the big nut, pull the wheel and reset it on the splines. But this won't
> change the turn signal behavior -- the autocancel boss is on the steering
> column shaft somewhere. This fact should tell you that the shaft is not
> centered. Which might well mean that the alignment shop has one tie rod set
> longer than the other (it's hard to make them give a hoot when it is
> tracking straight regardless -- the real trick is to get it tracking
> straight WITH THE WHEEL CENTERED, but they often don't want to believe
> this). Can you compare your turning radius, righthand versus lefthand?
>
> --
>
> Max Heim
> '66 MGB GHN3L76149
> If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
> it's the primer red one with chrome wires
>
> PS: My signals have never autocancelled, so I recenter the wheel all the
> time...
>
>
> on 5/11/12 1:52 PM, Andrew B. Lundgren at lundgren at byu.net wrote:
>
> > I have a '70 B.
> >
> > As long as I have had the car, you have to hold the wheel at about 5
> > degrees to the right to go straight.  I had the front end aligned a
> > while back, and I don't think it is out.
> >
> > My turn signal auto cancel is also impacted by the wheel not pointing
> > straight when the car is going straight.
> >
> > How do you align the steering wheel so that when you hold it straight,
> > the car goes straight?
> >
> > Thanks!
> >
> > --
> > Andrew
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe:
> http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/richard.ewald at gmail.com

From riverside at southslope.net  Fri May 11 23:48:43 2012
From: riverside at southslope.net (riverside at southslope.net)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 00:48:43 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] How to "align" the steering wheel?
In-Reply-To: <CBD2F095.3A28D%mvheim@sonic.net>
References: <CBD2F095.3A28D%mvheim@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <94137D434BD24D35A5040B336545157D@rileyPC>

If you do remove the steering wheel to recenter it, the autocancel  boss is 
visible.
It is simply a clip on the shaft and can be turned with a screwdriver to 
adjust the turn
signal cancellation. Don,t retighten the steering wheel nut until you are 
satisfied
with the turn signals as you may have to adjust more than once.
Ron Sanborn

-----Original Message----- 
From: Max Heim
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2012 6:36 PM
To: MG List
Subject: Re: [Mgs] How to "align" the steering wheel?

If it was just the steering wheel, I would remove the horn button, remove
the big nut, pull the wheel and reset it on the splines. But this won't
change the turn signal behavior -- the autocancel boss is on the steering
column shaft somewhere. This fact should tell you that the shaft is not
centered. Which might well mean that the alignment shop has one tie rod set
longer than the other (it's hard to make them give a hoot when it is
tracking straight regardless -- the real trick is to get it tracking
straight WITH THE WHEEL CENTERED, but they often don't want to believe
this). Can you compare your turning radius, righthand versus lefthand?

--

Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires

PS: My signals have never autocancelled, so I recenter the wheel all the
time...


on 5/11/12 1:52 PM, Andrew B. Lundgren at lundgren at byu.net wrote:

> I have a '70 B.
>
> As long as I have had the car, you have to hold the wheel at about 5
> degrees to the right to go straight.  I had the front end aligned a
> while back, and I don't think it is out.
>
> My turn signal auto cancel is also impacted by the wheel not pointing
> straight when the car is going straight.
>
> How do you align the steering wheel so that when you hold it straight,
> the car goes straight?
>
> Thanks!
>
> --
> Andrew
_______________________________________________

Mgs at autox.team.net
Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
Suggested annual donation  $12.75
Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
Unsubscribe: 
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/riverside at southslope.net



-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.2171 / Virus Database: 2425/4992 - Release Date: 05/11/12 

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Sat May 12 02:23:32 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 09:23:32 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] How to "align" the steering wheel?
References: <4FAD7C16.5000106@byu.net>
Message-ID: <A98F2A9DB22C4BA1A305147FC5CAE9AC@paul>

It depends what you mean by 'have to hold the wheel'.  If you mean the car 
drifts to the left unless you manually turn the wheel to the right to 
compensate that is a difference in suspension alignment between the two 
sides.  It's not toe as many think, with everything else equal that just 
causes both wheels to turn in or out by the same amount and the car still 
goes straight.  It's primarily the castor angle that gives the 
self-centering action of car steering, and if one side has more caster than 
the other that wheel will tend to go straighter, pulling the other one 
across, so you drift to the side that has the straight wheel.  Other 
suspension and rear axle alignment factors can also cause pulling to one 
side or the other.

But if you mean the car travels in a straight line on a flat and level road, 
but the steering wheel is off to the right, that is just the position of the 
wheel on the column splines, or the track-rods have been set up incorrectly, 
or both.  The track rods should be set such that the wheels turn the same 
amount from straight ahead each side.  The easiest way to check that is to 
mark the top centre of the wheel with tape when the car is going straight, 
then turn the wheel from lock to lock (easier with the front jacked up). 
Your mark should be at the same angle to the vertical each side on full 
lock, if it is more one side than the other then the track rods are out, so 
adjust both track rods by the same amount but in *opposite* directions (to 
keep the toe) to get the wheel angles the same.  If the wheel turns more to 
the right, then you need to screw the right-hand track rod into the 
track-rod end (to pull that wheel in) and the left-hand out to get it 
balanced.  Once you have that right now see where your wheel is pointing 
when you are going straight ahead, and adjust on the column splines 
accordingly.  That is only a step-change of course, so may be off slightly 
one way on one spline and the other way on the next, so tweak the track rods 
again to get it spot-on.  Then it would probably be best to get a tracking 
alignment done, making sure that they adjust both track rods by the same 
amount (but this time in the *same* directions) to keep the rack and wheel 
alignment.

Indicator cancelling is simply a matter of sliding the clip around the 
column until it is between the two switch fingers, pointing at the switch, 
with the wheel in the straight-ahead position.  That is for the later 
collapsible and full energy absorbing columns at least.  The earlier solid 
columns have a screwed peg in a fixed position so the column shaft has to be 
turned in the UJ (or the UJ on the rack shaft according to which has the 
bolt groove going all the way round the shaft) until the peg is at the right 
angle.  The 77 and later wheels and switches are self-adjusting as the 
cancelling arrangement is on the wheel itself.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> As long as I have had the car, you have to hold the wheel at about 5 
> degrees to the right to go straight.  I had the front end aligned a while 
> back, and I don't think it is out.
>
> My turn signal auto cancel is also impacted by the wheel not pointing 
> straight when the car is going straight.

From inim_mini at yahoo.com  Sat May 12 13:05:50 2012
From: inim_mini at yahoo.com (Rick Anderson)
Date: Sat, 12 May 2012 12:05:50 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Mgs] Woodland British Show and  Swapmeet May 20th
Message-ID: <1336849550.49435.YahooMailNeo@web140504.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>

I have 4 MG 1100 hubcaps - need some help but they can be restored, 2 good
Hydro bags - $50 each, misc chrome trim, a VERY good condition pedal box, a
complete ADO16 wiring harness - uncut, manifolds, distributors, pop-out
windows, NOS tail light lenses, overriders, and about 10 boxes of mixed
stuff.  I have 2 MGB transmissions, a '75 radiator, MGB seats (need
upholstery), am intake and exhaust manifold, cat, carb, etc from a '75.  I
also have the charcoal cannister, trans cross member, motor mounts, etc.  I
like in Napa if anybody wants to see this stuff ahead of time. 

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Sun May 13 09:44:35 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 16:44:35 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Roadster screen
Message-ID: <3523E74574F34CD791E5A6423FA091E8@paul>

Has anyone had the thick spacers and shims out of the sockets where the screen
legs go?  A pal is rebuilding what he bought as an abandoned restoration,
couldn't find these parts and has ordered and received them from one of the
usual suspects (MGOC).  As far as I was aware the spacers and shims were held
in the body with a small screw between the two main screen leg bolt holes.
However whilst the shims (looks like fibre board) have a central hole the
thick spacers don't.  Also the thick spacers have the AHH number heavily
embossed on one face, which will either go against the screen leg or the shim
and body.  As the bolts will pull the screen leg against the thick spacer, and
the shims, to the body panel it seems to me that the embossing could get
crushed over time, it is only alloy, loosening the screen.  The letters are
also on a plinth raising them even higher, so tightening the bolts is going to
tend to bend the spacer and/or the screen leg, depending on which way the
embossing faces.

So, *should* the small screw screw into the thick spacer?  And are originals
embossed like that?

Thanks,
PaulH.

From barneymg at mgaguru.com  Sun May 13 13:19:49 2012
From: barneymg at mgaguru.com (Barney Gaylord)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 14:19:49 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Roadster screen
In-Reply-To: <3523E74574F34CD791E5A6423FA091E8@paul>
References: <3523E74574F34CD791E5A6423FA091E8@paul>
Message-ID: <201205131919.q4DJJpmd026866@nlpi157.prodigy.net>

It might help if we knew what model car.  The MGA has no spacers, 
only fiber shims as required (not always).


At 04:44 PM 5/13/2012 +0100, PaulHunt73 wrote:
>Has anyone had the thick spacers and shims out of the sockets where 
>the screen legs go?  A pal is rebuilding what he bought as an 
>abandoned restoration, couldn't find these parts and has ordered and 
>received them from one of the usual suspects (MGOC).  As far as I 
>was aware the spacers and shims were held in the body with a small 
>screw between the two main screen leg bolt holes. However whilst the 
>shims (looks like fibre board) have a central hole the thick spacers 
>don't.  Also the thick spacers have the AHH number heavily embossed 
>on one face, which will either go against the screen leg or the shim 
>and body.  As the bolts will pull the screen leg against the thick 
>spacer, and the shims, to the body panel it seems to me that the 
>embossing could get crushed over time, it is only alloy, loosening 
>the screen.  The letters are also on a plinth raising them even 
>higher, so tightening the bolts is going to tend to bend the spacer 
>and/or the screen leg, depending on which way the embossing faces.
>
>So, *should* the small screw screw into the thick spacer?  And are 
>originals embossed like that?
>....

From mark at bradakis.com  Sun May 13 23:01:08 2012
From: mark at bradakis.com (Mark J Bradakis)
Date: Sun, 13 May 2012 23:01:08 -0600 (MDT)
Subject: [Mgs] Team.Net notes
Message-ID: <20120514050108.1FF6C2E0A5@bradakis.com>

       n case you are wondering:

http://www.team.net/status.html


mjb.

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Mon May 14 01:42:10 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 08:42:10 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Roadster screen
References: <3523E74574F34CD791E5A6423FA091E8@paul>
	<201205131919.q4DJJpmd026866@nlpi157.prodigy.net>
Message-ID: <CFBCF1F1C93540008912C49F77DF283C@paul>

True - MGB.  It's the spacers and packing that have to be right or you can 
crack the glass, which is why I'm bothered about the embossing getting 
compressed.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> It might help if we knew what model car.  The MGA has no spacers, only 
> fiber shims as required (not always).
>
>
> At 04:44 PM 5/13/2012 +0100, PaulHunt73 wrote:
>>Has anyone had the thick spacers and shims out of the sockets where the 
>>screen legs go? 

From mark at bradakis.com  Tue May 22 16:30:50 2012
From: mark at bradakis.com (Mark J Bradakis)
Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 16:30:50 -0600
Subject: [Mgs] Thanks, mjb
Message-ID: <4FBC139A.1010401@bradakis.com>

Gee, I was down at the Bailey's working on an MGB brake master
cylinder, wondering how they came apart.  What did I do?  Why, I
went to the Team.Net archives and searched the MG list for help.
Found what I needed to know, saved myself some time and trouble.

Guess I should send myself a donation for providing such a useful
service!

Too bad the archives couldn't help with getting the wrong TR6 parts
for that car.  Oh well.


mjb.

From shop at justbrits.com  Sat May 26 10:21:09 2012
From: shop at justbrits.com (" Just Brits " Shop)
Date: Sat, 26 May 2012 11:21:09 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] BBC - 1929 MG buried in concrete..........
In-Reply-To: <CAN+beMoRPn8dpWWUaE_n4N-h99JjsGrZ2mkYiEhXJ4GhTmSXQA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAN+beMoRPn8dpWWUaE_n4N-h99JjsGrZ2mkYiEhXJ4GhTmSXQA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FC102F5.6040100@justbrits.com>

Holy smokes ! ! !
This a GREAT story & a BEAUTIFUL car ! ! !

Ed

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Re: Motorhead 101 - BBC - 1929 MG buried in concrete..........
Date: 	Sat, 26 May 2012 08:35:21 -0700
From: 	Rick Feibusch

	

BBC - 1929 MG buried in concrete..........
submitted by Edward Voelcker

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-gloucestershire-18194870

From shop at justbrits.com  Mon May 28 19:00:16 2012
From: shop at justbrits.com (" Just Brits " Shop)
Date: Mon, 28 May 2012 20:00:16 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Fwd: Memorial Day Video 2012
In-Reply-To: <CAN+beMrxo6MkvknpYR-uHUHPpjZFEtKjeHrqxB8VO7TgqjveVg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAN+beMrxo6MkvknpYR-uHUHPpjZFEtKjeHrqxB8VO7TgqjveVg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4FC41FA0.3040907@justbrits.com>

This is too good not to share, folks.

"Non Sibi Sed Patriae" - "Semper Fortis" - "Anchors Aweigh"

Ed
XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: 	Memorial Day Video 2012
Date: 	Mon, 28 May 2012 13:59:45 -0700
From: 	Rick Feibusch

	

	

Nice short film - submitted by Robert W. of Marina del Rey, CA

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2487638612433437293&q=Vetera

From steve at shoyer.com  Tue May 29 08:53:58 2012
From: steve at shoyer.com (Steve Shoyer)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 10:53:58 -0400
Subject: [Mgs] Adhesive suggestions for carpet and seats
Message-ID: <94A7C2B62CBF4DEABCAEBB25105A8DA5@SteveLenovo>

I'm finally replacing the interior on my 1980 MGB.  I bought the light tan
leather complete kit from Moss, but I wasn't sure which adhesive I should
use.  I looked through the archives but only found old posts; has anyone
used anything recently that they would recommend?  Thanks.
 
--Steve (1980 MGB)

From shop at justbrits.com  Tue May 29 09:23:40 2012
From: shop at justbrits.com (" Just Brits " Shop)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 10:23:40 -0500
Subject: [Mgs] Adhesive suggestions for carpet and seats
In-Reply-To: <94A7C2B62CBF4DEABCAEBB25105A8DA5@SteveLenovo>
References: <94A7C2B62CBF4DEABCAEBB25105A8DA5@SteveLenovo>
Message-ID: <4FC4E9FC.6050003@justbrits.com>

Hi Steve !

<< On 5/29/2012 9:53 AM, Steve Shoyer wrote:

.....has anyone used anything recently that they would recommend?   >>

Stop in an Old Car Upholstery Shop (with a box of donuts<G>) and ask 
them.  They will be more up on things than anyone <G><G><G> ! ! !

And do NOT glue the carpets ! ! !  If you botch a couple of the @ 1" 
round snaps, I have in stock <G> ! ! !

Ed
Please visit MY site at:
www.justbrits.com

From d_dibiase at yahoo.com  Tue May 29 09:25:22 2012
From: d_dibiase at yahoo.com (Dan DiBiase)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 08:25:22 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Mgs] BCW
Message-ID: <1338305122.76954.YahooMailNeo@web39406.mail.mud.yahoo.com>

I'd be remiss if I didn't wish everyone a 'Happy British Car Week'!

Dan D
'65 B, '76 B
Central NJ USA

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Tue May 29 09:24:39 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 16:24:39 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Adhesive suggestions for carpet and seats
References: <94A7C2B62CBF4DEABCAEBB25105A8DA5@SteveLenovo>
Message-ID: <951AE1055F954369AC8CCEE285FB4F83@paul>

I used an aerosol adhesive for both.  Can't remember the brand, it was 22 
years ago.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> I'm finally replacing the interior on my 1980 MGB.  I bought the light tan
> leather complete kit from Moss, but I wasn't sure which adhesive I should
> use. 

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Tue May 29 09:57:10 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 16:57:10 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Adhesive suggestions for carpet and seats
References: <94A7C2B62CBF4DEABCAEBB25105A8DA5@SteveLenovo>
	<4FC4E9FC.6050003@justbrits.com>
Message-ID: <AF4315D031654D55944ECBA0D11DE3B3@paul>

Carpet does need gluing on sills, rear arches, and heel board.  (Toe boards? 
Can't remember).  It's true floor carpets don't - the rear is retained by 
the seat runners, the front by three snaps each side.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> And do NOT glue the carpets ! ! ! 

From dcouncill at msubillings.edu  Tue May 29 10:51:25 2012
From: dcouncill at msubillings.edu (Councill, David)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 16:51:25 +0000
Subject: [Mgs] Adhesive suggestions for carpet and seats
In-Reply-To: <AF4315D031654D55944ECBA0D11DE3B3@paul>
References: <94A7C2B62CBF4DEABCAEBB25105A8DA5@SteveLenovo>
	<4FC4E9FC.6050003@justbrits.com>
	<AF4315D031654D55944ECBA0D11DE3B3@paul>
Message-ID: <E7D7B13F08EBC4438FAEAFB46F80C1FA461F830A@BILEXMB01.msubillings.edu>

I'm a little late on this but I can add a bit to what Paul says. When I did my
72B, the previous owner had glued in all  the carpet pieces and it was a real
pain to remove. So with that lesson, I installed the new carpet with minimal
glue. I used a 3M spray adhesive, and I lightly sprayed the sill and rear arch
pieces. The heel board attached with screws as I recall. The tunnel piece,
floor pieces, and rear had less need to secure, and definitely not requiring
glue.

David Councill
64 B
67 BGT
72 B

-----Original Message-----
From: mgs-bounces at autox.team.net [mailto:mgs-bounces at autox.team.net] On Behalf
Of PaulHunt73
Sent: Tuesday, May 29, 2012 9:57 AM
To: mgs at autox.team.net
Subject: Re: [Mgs] Adhesive suggestions for carpet and seats

Carpet does need gluing on sills, rear arches, and heel board.  (Toe boards?
Can't remember).  It's true floor carpets don't - the rear is retained by the
seat runners, the front by three snaps each side.

PaulH.

----- Original Message -----
> And do NOT glue the carpets ! ! !

From mvheim at sonic.net  Tue May 29 11:21:40 2012
From: mvheim at sonic.net (Max Heim)
Date: Tue, 29 May 2012 10:21:40 -0700
Subject: [Mgs] Adhesive suggestions for carpet and seats
In-Reply-To: <AF4315D031654D55944ECBA0D11DE3B3@paul>
Message-ID: <CBEA53B4.3ACC5%mvheim@sonic.net>

After customizing the tunnel cover to fit the 4-synchro tranny, I had to
redo the tunnel carpet from scratch, so I installed snaps. The tunnel carpet
is what gets soaked first if you're ever caught using the tonneau when it
rains, so it's handy to have it removable. The floor carpet goes without
saying...


--

Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires


on 5/29/12 8:57 AM, PaulHunt73 at paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com wrote:

> Carpet does need gluing on sills, rear arches, and heel board.  (Toe boards?
> Can't remember).  It's true floor carpets don't - the rear is retained by
> the seat runners, the front by three snaps each side.
> 
> PaulH.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> And do NOT glue the carpets ! ! ! 

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Wed May 30 01:51:18 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 08:51:18 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Adhesive suggestions for carpet and seats
References: <CBEA53B4.3ACC5%mvheim@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <9CF7B7D082AB45FA8C7548F2090B67C5@paul>

Tunnel carpet just drops on and sits there, as far as I'm aware, no glue or 
snaps.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> After customizing the tunnel cover to fit the 4-synchro tranny, I had to
> redo the tunnel carpet from scratch, so I installed snaps. 

From mvheim at sonic.net  Wed May 30 09:32:06 2012
From: mvheim at sonic.net (Max Heim)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 08:32:06 -0700
Subject: [Mgs] Adhesive suggestions for carpet and seats
In-Reply-To: <9CF7B7D082AB45FA8C7548F2090B67C5@paul>
Message-ID: <CBEB8B86.3AD72%mvheim@sonic.net>

Not the kind you get from Moss. It's not exactly fitted -- it would be like
tossing a burlap bag over the tunnel and expecting it to stay put.

--

Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires


on 5/30/12 12:51 AM, PaulHunt73 at paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com wrote:

> Tunnel carpet just drops on and sits there, as far as I'm aware, no glue or
> snaps.
> 
> PaulH.
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
>> After customizing the tunnel cover to fit the 4-synchro tranny, I had to
>> redo the tunnel carpet from scratch, so I installed snaps.

From paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com  Wed May 30 09:58:57 2012
From: paulhunt73 at virginmedia.com (PaulHunt73)
Date: Wed, 30 May 2012 16:58:57 +0100
Subject: [Mgs] Adhesive suggestions for carpet and seats
References: <CBEB8B86.3AD72%mvheim@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <CDADBE6B79F244FD94482473AD521CCE@paul>

Mine's not moulded, but it still stays where it is.  The centre armrest 
probably helps.

PaulH.

----- Original Message ----- 
> Not the kind you get from Moss. It's not exactly fitted -- it would be 
> like
> tossing a burlap bag over the tunnel and expecting it to stay put.

From davewillner at pa.net  Thu May 31 17:25:32 2012
From: davewillner at pa.net (davewillner)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 19:25:32 -0400
Subject: [Mgs] air pump question for a 70
Message-ID: <072286C1CAC445CB892BA6ACF4BAD399@valued9cfc0b6f>

When I purchased my 70 about 5 years ago for my wife, it had all the smog and
air pump pieces removed and blocked off pretty well. It looks ok under the
hood, although not quite original and the car runs extremely well with no
issues what so ever. I recently purchased a complete used set up in very good
shape with all the hoses, air pump, filter, etc, from a 71 B kinda ready to
just install.  What kind of "can of worms" am I going to open up after I get
this installed, I mean what should I expect performance-wise? I think it would
be a nice feature to show just because there are so few of them installed
these days, and I've been a stickler on originality with this one...Any ideas
on what I can expect, or should I steer clear and forgot it?  Thanks for the
help...

Dave Willner
Stroudsburg PA
59 TR3A
70 MGB
70 BSA 441 VS

From mvheim at sonic.net  Thu May 31 17:53:46 2012
From: mvheim at sonic.net (Max Heim)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 16:53:46 -0700
Subject: [Mgs] air pump question for a 70
In-Reply-To: <072286C1CAC445CB892BA6ACF4BAD399@valued9cfc0b6f>
Message-ID: <CBED529A.3AEAB%mvheim@sonic.net>

I suppose you could could gut the pump so it was free-spinning, install all
the hoses but block them off, so it looked factory but functioned the same
as it does now...

Just a thought.

--

Max Heim
'66 MGB GHN3L76149
If you're near Menlo Park, CA,
it's the primer red one with chrome wires


on 5/31/12 4:25 PM, davewillner at davewillner at pa.net wrote:

> When I purchased my 70 about 5 years ago for my wife, it had all the smog and
> air pump pieces removed and blocked off pretty well. It looks ok under the
> hood, although not quite original and the car runs extremely well with no
> issues what so ever. I recently purchased a complete used set up in very good
> shape with all the hoses, air pump, filter, etc, from a 71 B kinda ready to
> just install.  What kind of "can of worms" am I going to open up after I get
> this installed, I mean what should I expect performance-wise? I think it would
> be a nice feature to show just because there are so few of them installed
> these days, and I've been a stickler on originality with this one...Any ideas
> on what I can expect, or should I steer clear and forgot it?  Thanks for the
> help...
> 
> Dave Willner
> Stroudsburg PA
> 59 TR3A
> 70 MGB
> 70 BSA 441 VS

From richard.ewald at gmail.com  Thu May 31 21:09:12 2012
From: richard.ewald at gmail.com (Richard Ewald)
Date: Thu, 31 May 2012 20:09:12 -0700
Subject: [Mgs] air pump question for a 70
In-Reply-To: <072286C1CAC445CB892BA6ACF4BAD399@valued9cfc0b6f>
References: <072286C1CAC445CB892BA6ACF4BAD399@valued9cfc0b6f>
Message-ID: <EF15F0A2-C545-4A14-8BFF-A708CB82000C@gmail.com>

Assuming nothing you install is FUBAR and it all works as designed, you won't
notice much difference.
A bit less power from the engine from running the pump is all.
I would note that the first paragraph is one hell of an assumption.
Rick
Sent from my iPhone

On May 31, 2012, at 16:25, "davewillner" <davewillner at pa.net> wrote:

> When I purchased my 70 about 5 years ago for my wife, it had all the smog
and
> air pump pieces removed and blocked off pretty well. It looks ok under the
> hood, although not quite original and the car runs extremely well with no
> issues what so ever. I recently purchased a complete used set up in very
good
> shape with all the hoses, air pump, filter, etc, from a 71 B kinda ready to
> just install.  What kind of "can of worms" am I going to open up after I
get
> this installed, I mean what should I expect performance-wise? I think it
would
> be a nice feature to show just because there are so few of them installed
> these days, and I've been a stickler on originality with this one...Any
ideas
> on what I can expect, or should I steer clear and forgot it?  Thanks for
the
> help...
>
> Dave Willner
> Stroudsburg PA
> 59 TR3A
> 70 MGB
> 70 BSA 441 VS
> _______________________________________________
>
> Mgs at autox.team.net
> Donate: http://www.team.net/donate.html
> Suggested annual donation  $12.75
> Archive: http://www.team.net/archive
> Forums: http://www.team.net/forums
> Unsubscribe:
http://autox.team.net/mailman/options/mgs/richard.ewald at gmail.com