• Hi Guest!
    You can help ensure that British Car Forum (BCF) continues to provide a great place to engage in the British car hobby! If you find BCF a beneficial community, please consider supporting our efforts with a subscription.
    There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
Tips
Tips

'63 Midget Rear End

Share this page

I would suggest that many differences certainly do exist but they tend to be more by model year than badge type, and certainly more with appearance details such as Tony describes as well as trim (chrome bits etc.) than mechanicals, kinda like the differences between Buicks and Oldsmobiles (perish the thought! :eeek: )
 
Excellent point Donn.
 
OK, I know you are right, but you know what I meant, maybe I should have said Chevy and Olds (but even that is not a perfect analogy)! What I was referring to was "badge engineering"!
 
But, I think Donn is saying that the Badge Engineering was really just that. More in line with Fords/Mercs of the 70's/80's.
 
<span style="text-decoration: underline">That's</span> the analogy I was looking for Trevor!!! :thumbsup:
(What can I say, I'm just not that familiar with the "big" stuff!! :rolleyes: )
 
Camaros & Firebirds?

I've seen some that were pretty hard to tell apart.
 
RickB said:
Camaros & Firebirds?

I've seen some that were pretty hard to tell apart.
Click to expand...

I know, after awhile, one mullet looks pretty much the same as another :jester:
 
A Chevy engine is not a Pontiac engine, and don't try to tell an American car nut that it is. The only ones you left out now are Cadillac and GMC (which is identical to Chevy).

But when it comes to a Morris, Austin, MG differential, gearbox or engine, they're all the same. Gosh, even the Triumph spitfire engine is the same as a Midget engine.
 
Almost all BMC/British Leyland vehicles were "badge engineered". GM does it all the time,the Opel/vauxhall/Saturn Aura is an example. :rolleyes:

Stuart. :cheers:
 
But many of those have different engines and/or equipment.

I mean a Volvo S40 and a Ford Focus are built on the same platform, but it would be VERY hard to convert one into the other.

Sharing a common platform is one thing, but Badge Engineering is when there is no mechanical difference and the body variations are limited to trim/grills/tail lights... badges.
 
FWIW, on my '68 Sprite, the third member is unpainted aluminum. Now, I received the car when it was 35 years old, so who knows if a Midget rear end had ever been thrown in? It's definitely a 4.22, and it was never painted/coated. I am not going to paint it either, I like the aluminum look. Beautiful right next to my freshly satin-rustoleum-ed axle (I don't like flat or gloss under a car, satin is perfect IMO).
 
All I'm saying is that - badge engineering accepted (& the MG MkIII Farina Magnette was probably the biggest example) - there are some obvious differences between the Midget & Sprite.....yes, they are on the same platform....yes, they are mechanically the same....but, the way they were put together & the badge changes make them different.....so different that one can't say that what applies to 1 applies to both.

Here's a tiny example (but an example that should count off in a concours judging): many early Sprites had a passenger grab handle on the dash from the factory...no Midget ever had one.

I'm trying to build my '63 as the factory would've produced i (well....except for a few upgrades that would've/could've been done to an MG by a dealer).
 
I see what you are saying. To me, they are the same car because my interest in them is about how they drive and their basic configuration (2-door convertible/roadster). But they are different to you because you are more interested in the historical significance and having a collection of proper MG's.

Let's face it, spridgets are bastards. Many die hard MG people think of them as toy Austins made to look like MG's, and many Healey people think that they could have been a good car but the BMC group screwed it up before they could evolve into a proper sport cars. BTW, this is a GROSS generalization and just an opinion I formed based on my perceptions.
 
Trevor Jessie said:
I see what you are saying. To me, they are the same car because my interest in them is about how they drive and their basic configuration (2-door convertible/roadster). But they are different to you because you are more interested in the historical significance and having a collection of proper MG's.

Let's face it, spridgets are bastards. Many die hard MG people think of them as toy Austins made to look like MG's, and many Healey people think that they could have been a good car but the BMC group screwed it up before they could evolve into a proper sport cars. BTW, this is a GROSS generalization and just an opinion I formed based on my perceptions.
Click to expand...
I've gotta admit, I've owned my Midgets for years & have done nothing to them except drive 'em (well 2 of them anyway)...they were always in my collection just to complete it (like the 1960 MkIII Farina Magnette).....but, now that I'm redoing my '63 Midget, I may start on my '74 RWA Midget......I always enjoyed driving those 2 cars.

But, the little Midget is fighting me every step of the way on this restoration....maybe its because I keep thinking about how to do things on my MGB's & this little sucker is so different from them its not funny!
 
Ahhh...

Now the light turns on!

Yes, you really can't approach the Midget the same way you approach the MGB. They really are (almost) completely different animals.
I say *almost* because there are things like the electrical systems that share a lot of similarities, in fact the used fuse block I just got would be at home in both my Midget and my MGB.

That being said, from the suspension up you have to work differently on the Midget than you do on the MGB.
They are just not the same *kind* of car.
 
I'm not sure what document folks are referring to when they mention a/the "concours guide".

The only true concours I have attended was the one held in conjunction with MG International 2006 in Gatlinburg. This was under the sanction of NAMGBR (North American MGB Register).

The judging consisted of three teams of two judges each; the judging teams focused on engine and drive drain/underbonnet, interior and general presentation, and mechanical (everything was tested to see that it worked correctly). According to the guideline document published before the event, vehicles were to be judged on "originality, condition, and technical inspection".

A total of 1000 points were awarded each participant at the start and points were deducted for each issue; non original parts, improperly functioning parts/systems, parts showing wear. Three levels of scoring were recognized; Certificate of Merit (invited to participate in concours), Certificate of Honorable Mention (second tier), and Certificate of Excellence (top tier).

According to the "NAMGBR Concours Judging Guidelines MG2006" the "...official reference books of NAMGBR Concours judging are 'Original MGB' and 'Original Sprite and Midget'". For the Spridgets, that's the Horler book.

Just a bit of info...

Ray
 
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:]'Original Sprite and Midget'". For the Spridgets, that's the Horler book.[/QUOTE]
&, IMO, that book sucks! It doesn't have enough detailed photos...it doesn't make clear the differences between the Midget & Sprite other than the cosmetic ones...unless a person really knew the differences, they'd count off for one of the cars.

& IMO the book leans too heavily towards Sprites!
 
So, Tony,...a better alternative?

I can't imagine the challenge of attempting to write a definitive work on something as detailed as a car....especially many years AFTER the last original rolled off the line. Locating survivors in itself would be difficult and there are bound to be discrepancies among them. Is that particular part truly original? Oriented correctly? Painted correctly? Or should it be painted at all?

Funny, over time the mind clouds a bit and those of us old enough to REMEMBER what they actually looked like...must rely upon our memory...to remember what they looked like...

There are period photos available, and brochures and other contemporary publications...but much of that was pre-production detail. And the running changes...I'm amazed that Horler was able to capture as much as he did.

That said, I know there are some people that are VERY passionate about preserving the history of our LBCs via concours examples, Paul Hanley, the NAMGBR Concours Chairman for one. While many folks will give Paul and others a hard time about their 'nit picking" concours rules, there's you and me, and others on this list that appreciate picking the nits and even wish SOMEONE would do a better job of it in print.

BTW...it was my observation that the only time the "book" was actually brought out, it was to clarify a dispute between the judges and car owner...if it wasn't in the book, there was no deduction. The judges I observed really knew their stuff...and that makes ALL the difference between concours and your average car show.

Ray
 
Dunno, Ray...I used my '74 RWA for some things when I wondered...used old photos for other things...used examples of original cars & restored cars (but made sure I could verify more than once) & I'm sure I still will miss something.

But don't tell me my transmission should be painted just because there's a photo of an unrestored Sprite with a painted one....especially when I know better.
 
Back
Top