MG Reviews
Cecil Kimber was manager of Morris Garages in Oxford when he commissioned some sports cars to be built on a Morris chassis in 1923. Their appeal prompted more models and MG soon became one of the favourite pre-war British performance marques. In 1952, it joined BMC and introduced the much-loved MGA, then the MGB, which was produced from 1962 to 1980.
After the Abingdon factory was closed, MG existed only as a badge on hot Austin saloons until the MG RV8 of 1992 announced the proper rebirth of the badge. The mid-engined MGF was an exciting return to form. Since it went into administration in 2005, MG has been Chinese-owned, first by Nanjing Automobile Corporation (NAC), then Shanghai Automobile Industry Corporation (SAIC).
.jpg)
Good:
Dignified pre-war style, plenty of tuning potential
Bad:
Slow in standard guise
.jpg)
Good:
Truly charming roadster that drives better than you'd imagine
Bad:
Cramped and basic - but that's the appeal!
.jpg)
Good:
Handsome styling, known B-Series engine and running gear
Bad:
Sportier to look at than to drive
.jpg)
Good:
Beautiful styling, fast in Twin Cam form
Bad:
B-Series engine feels unsporting, Twin Cams are fragile
.jpg)
Good:
Cheap and simple to fix, good parts availability, nice interior
Bad:
Stolid to drive
.jpg)
Good:
Immense fun, cheap and cheerful, especially to fix
Bad:
Many are rotten, and values are low, which means few are restored properly
.jpg)
Good:
Good to look at, fun to drive, amazing parts availability, the archetypal classic roadster and coupe
Bad:
They're not uncommon - if you like to be different, an MGB is not for you
.jpg)
Good:
Good roadholding and ride, great steering, many parts shared with the Mini
Bad:
Rust and difficult servicing
.jpg)
Good:
Nice sounding six-cylinder, easy high speed cruising, lots of tuning potential.
Bad:
Heavy thirst
.jpg)
Good:
Elastic performance, ease of driving, nice soundtrack
Bad:
Engine tightly packed in its bay, so servicing can be difficult
.jpg)
Good:
Go-kart like handling, brilliant steering, turbo performance
Bad:
Cramped in the back, needs a five-speed gearbox, very few left
.jpg)
Good:
Good to drive, quick and economical
Bad:
Lack of build quality and cosmetic rust
.jpg)
Good:
Roomy, fast and good to drive
Bad:
Shocking build quality and corrosion
Good:
Great looks, easy - and surprisingly rapid - performance, brilliant parts availability, a perfect exhaust note, lots of very nice examples for sale
Bad:
In standard form the RV8 isn't what you would describe as a driver's car, but if you want that combination, buy a TVR Griffith
Good:
Decent ride and rewarding handling. ZT190 is quick while the V8-engined rear-drive 260 hugely entertaining. Proving reliable and now quite cheap. Excellent club back-up.
Bad:
Odball spares can sometimes be tricky to source. V8 undeveloped.
Good:
Practical everyday roadster with a surprising amount of luggage space for a mid-engined car, decent handling, plenty of used ones around
Bad:
Build quality problems, head gasket failure is common, fared very badly in customer satisfaction surveys
Good:
Enjoyable handling. Good pace from the 180 version.
Bad:
Four-cylinder K series engines are prone to overheating and head gasket failure.
Good:
Quick enough in 160 guise. Tidy handling.
Bad:
Overheating and head gasket failure with K series four-cylinder engines. Not that roomy.
