Oppo's stance on the MGB's Rubber Bumper 

"djmt1" (djmt1) 04/29/2016 at 17:43 • Filed to: None

2

21

I think I’m on board with it now. I mean I prefer the normal front end but if I was given one with a rubber front I probably wouldn’t swap it out.

Slant6 > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 17:48

0

i agree

Klaus Schmoll > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 17:49

1

Everybody was switching them to chrome bumpers to the point where unmolested rubber boats start fetching decent moneys. I’d probably do something about that lifted suspension though.

4muddyfeet - bare knuckle with an EZ30 > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 17:50

0

They're so damn heavy though.

Steve in Manhattan > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 17:50

0

I never minded it ....

djmt1 > 4muddyfeet - bare knuckle with an EZ30 04/29/2016 at 17:53

0

Are they?

Svend > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 17:55

1

Nope. Hate the rubber bumper look.

The three I like are:-

BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 17:55

4

I’m generally onboard with them as a clever solution to the 5mph standards at the time. Most other manufacturers just stuck diving boards on the front and called it a day whereas MG actually tried to integrate them into the design.

They originally wanted them to be body coloured by couldn’t find a paint that was flexible enough not to crack. Looks much improved IMHO.

Personally I would ditch them though, but only because they weigh a lot and it’s an easy way to shed weight.

4muddyfeet - bare knuckle with an EZ30 > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 17:57

0

I'm sure someone told me that if you swap plastic to chrome you need to change the springs as well because of the nose rise.

415s30 W123TSXWaggoIIIIIIo ( •_•))°) > Svend 04/29/2016 at 18:02

0

Mmmm Sebring flares....

BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 18:06

0

Front bumper is 19.7kg vs ~8kg

Rear is 20.4kg vs ~8kg

Svend > BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires 04/29/2016 at 18:07

2

They look like a cross between a rubber bumper MGB and the end of the MGB era MG RV8.

djmt1 > BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires 04/29/2016 at 18:09

1

They are indeed “damn heavy”. I take it back, I would do the swap.

BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires > Svend 04/29/2016 at 18:09

0

No love for the ‘72?

BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 18:13

2

Yeah my opinion is that they were a good solution to the pressures of the time, but now that those pressures aren’t around there’s not much reason to keep them.

vicali > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 18:23

0

Nope - but I may have been influenced by my friend Chris and his v8;

http://www.mgexp.com/member/cgill

Svend > BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires 04/29/2016 at 18:23

1

Ye’, I like it. I like the chrome bumpers, chrome bumpers with lower valence and without bumpers. The rubber ones look ugly and remind me of how some cars were ruined by having to conform to U.S. regs.

AMC/Renauledge > BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires 04/29/2016 at 18:28

0

I don’t know if they couldn’t find flexible paint. GM had been using it since the ‘68 GTO ‘70.5 Firebird and Camaro, and ‘73 Grand Am. The ‘73 Corvette got it, too. Even the Bricklin SV-1 used it.

I think BL were either too cheap or too broke to afford it on the B and Midget, both of which were aging and had in-house competition gobbling up development money. Not to mention replacements in development, that would never arrive.

AMC/Renauledge > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 18:30

0

The chin spoiler actually helps it a lot. It reduces the visual mass.

BiTurbo228 - Dr Frankenstein of Spitfires > AMC/Renauledge 04/29/2016 at 18:56

1

Yeah it’s probably that they couldn’t find a flexible enough paint for a low enough price, and then couldn’t work out how to make one in-house for cheaper. By the mid 70s the strength of the pound meant that the profit margins on Bs sold in the States were razor-thin, plus all the issues of competition (although that didn’t seem to dent their sales as they were still outselling the then-new TR7 by the time the B was cancelled).

ranwhenparked > djmt1 04/29/2016 at 23:27

0

I don’t mind them, they gave the car kind of a more streamlined, modern appearance.

The raised ride height and smog strangled engines were the bigger problem.

Those bumpers were originally supposed to be painted body color, but British Leyland couldn’t come up with a paint formulation flexible enough to adhere properly.

Certainly, they can’t be that badly regarded, since the later MG F /T F was consciously modeled after the look of the rubber bumper MGB.

gmporschenut also a fan of hondas > djmt1 04/30/2016 at 00:56

0

if it means another MGB, good. not terrible compared to other 70's models.