Plan B Forum

And now I have one. The TA was the two seater that MG was making a year before the war broke out. The MGTB had a short run of only 300+ cars before the factory turned to war production. TB's are rarer than rare. TAs are close.

A college friend of mine, who is the only person I ever stood next to at a wedding that I didn't marry, has a farm about 90 miles north of here. Some of his cattle got out of their fence a couple of weeks ago. One cow led him to a tree row about a mile from his house. Among the trees were some decrepit vehicles. One was a "classic" MG. A 1937 MGTA to be exact. The guy who had it, inherited it from his father by default. No one else in the family wanted the old thing. He had kept it in his barn until six or eight years ago when he "got tired of tripping over it", and pulled it outside. I wish I could call it a barn find, but it's too late. Apparently the father bought the TA as a parts car for his MGTC, which was produced after the war. He thought it was the same model. It's not. Very few parts will interchange. So the parts car went unmolested and unloved for many years. It needs EVERYTHING. All of the wood in the body is rotten and/or missing. The wiring is rat chewed. My hope is to at least make it run, but even that will be difficult.

MGMcA -- Does it look better than this one?

Oh you lucky man!!

MGMcAnick wrote:And now I have one. The TA was the two seater that MG was making a year before the war broke out. The MGTB had a short run of only 300+ cars before the factory turned to war production. TB's are rarer than rare. TAs are close.

A college friend of mine, who is the only person I ever stood next to at a wedding that I didn't marry, has a farm about 90 miles north of here. Some of his cattle got out of their fence a couple of weeks ago. One cow led him to a tree row about a mile from his house. Among the trees were some decrepit vehicles. One was a "classic" MG. A 1937 MGTA to be exact. The guy who had it, inherited it from his father by default. No one else in the family wanted the old thing. He had kept it in his barn until six or eight years ago when he "got tired of tripping over it", and pulled it outside. I wish I could call it a barn find, but it's too late. Apparently the father bought the TA as a parts car for his MGTC, which was produced after the war. He thought it was the same model. It's not. Very few parts will interchange. So the parts car went unmolested and unloved for many years. It needs EVERYTHING. All of the wood in the body is rotten and/or missing. The wiring is rat chewed. My hope is to at least make it run, but even that will be difficult.

1937 MG? Can't you rebuild the whole thing with a screwdriver and pliers?

Considering the fact that some parts (including the frame! ) were made of wood, he'll probably need a saw, too...

RayThom wrote:MGMcA -- Does it look better than this one?

In some ways TA1679 in that picture is better than mine. It came down the line about 50 cars before. http://www.mgcars.us/TA1679.html
At least it has been disassembled, so they know what they have. I have not even started on mine yet.

Yes there is a lot of wood in the framework of the body. A lot of car bodies were built with metal shaped over wood in the early days. MG was one of the last hold outs, finally giving up in the '50s with the MGA, like mine that I bought when I was in high school. Morgan still does it that way. Most of my car's wood is pretty rotten. No, it's completely rotten. There is a retired USAF fighter pilot in Arizona who makes all the wood pieces. Not cheap, and some assembly required. The chassis frame is metal, just like most cars. Spindly little thing.

I thought you were a woodworker...?

Jarlaxle wrote:I thought you were a woodworker...?

Not unless the wood bolts together. It's MGMcAnick, not MGMcArpenter

The first order of business was to unload all of the pack rat evidence from the engine area and interior. I met the rat before I wenched the car onto the trailer as he fled to find a new home. I FILLED a 55 gallon barrel, and my big shop vac was still full when I declared victory over the mess.

I bought a gallon of PB Blaster. It came with a refillable metal pump can. I only used about a cup on the engine. Its serial number matches that on the brass VIN plate on the firewall. MG stamped both numbers on the plate. I have the engine turning freely with the starter. It has good compression for a 1937 engine that has been sitting for many years. All four cylinder were over 90 PSIg, and within 10%.

I have ordered the intake and exhaust manifold gasket and carb gaskets from the guy in AZ. The twin SU carbs are not ready to suck yet. They were buried under the stuff in the interior. Since the top was tattered and essentially missing, they had been wet over and over. One of the throttle butterflies is frozen. I keep spraying PB Blaster on the areas that seem to be holding it in place. Twisting the shaft too hard might break it. It's brass.

Your future classic? Stay focused.

Mine will probably remain red, but that BRG one is sure nice.

One of the differences that allowed me to easily identify the car as a TA are the three rubber strips on each running board. MGTCs and TBs have two strips, probably as a cost cutting measure. One of the parking light lenses in the top of each of my car's fenders is translucent like those in the picture. The other has a clear lens with concentric circles. I'll bet those in the picture are right.

Maybe try a heat gun on the carbs?

MGMcA - I just stumbled upon this and I thought you might find it interesting...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=no7no0N ... SteveBaker

Fuzzy old minds want to know-- When did the fashion develop to put outside rearview mirrors way out on the front of the fenders? Or straped on the top of outside-mounted spare tires? That is way I remember TR3's and Austin Healy 100's and older sports cars.

snailgate

Econoline, thanks for the link.
That MGTA appears to be restored as one would have been built for racing back when the TA was nearly new, not that they weren't raced bone stock in their day. Nice, expensive, restomod job. Since mine still has four nice original fenders, I'd not do that with it, even if I could afford it. Unfortunately I have too many projects, not enough dimes.

Burning Petard wrote: ↑

Sun Jul 31, 2022 12:17 pm

Fuzzy old minds want to know-- When did the fashion develop to put outside rearview mirrors way out on the front of the fenders?
snailgate

You'll note that they got away from it as the far away mirrors were simply not practical. The driver can't see what they need to see with them. The field of vision is incredibly narrow. The last ones I recall were on Japanese cars made for the Japanese market.

My 1960-something Austin A40 (grey, not green) had them. Useless.

Maybe it was an early form of 'ricing' ... adding something to your vehicle that was functionally useless but still looked cool.

And incidentally, while it did seem to be most prevalent on Asian import vehicle (Hondas, Toyotas, etc) — which were sometimes referred to, in a derogatory manner, as 'riceburners' — I found out that 'ricing' is derived from the acronym RICE ... Racing-Inspired Cosmetic Enhancements, which goes back to the early hot-rod days and the wanna-be's who would mount things like hood scoops (that did not go to a cold-air intake), rear-deck spoilers, dummy hood-retaining pins, and fake sidepipes or dual exhaust tips.

-"BB"-

I don't remember 'ricing' but in the 60's I did hear remarks about modifications that were "guaranteed to increase stationary speed by at least ten percent!"

snailgate