MG MGF (1995 – 2002) Review
MG MGF (1995 – 2002) At A Glance
Practical everyday roadster with a surprising amount of luggage space for a mid-engined car, decent handling, plenty of used ones around
Build quality problems, head gasket failure is common, fared very badly in customer satisfaction surveys
The MGF was the first all-new MG roadster since the arrival of the 'B in 1962. It also scored a notable production first for being mid-engined (the ADO21 and MG EX-E were also mid-engined, but didn't get near to going on sale). The MGF had superb weight distribution and brilliant roadholding thanks to its interconnected Hydragas suspension system. It was a clever little car that used many other off-the-shelf parts - not least a pair of Metro subframes, and its K-Series engine.
In summary, the MGF was greater than the sum of its parts, and remains a unique driving experience to this day. There are two engines available, the 1.8i K-series 1796cc 16v and the 1.8i VVC (Variable Valve Control), with power figures of 118bhp and 143bhp respectively which give a 0-60 time of 8.5 (1.8i) and 7.0 (VVC) seconds. Many bargains can be had, but shop carefully...
Join the club
Honest John Classics has teamed up with MG Car Club (the world's oldest MG club) to offer readers £5 off single and joint memberships. Joining the club means joining the largest group of MG fans in the world and getting access to first-rate technical knowledge as well as the chance to save money on your insurance premiums. Simply visit www.mgcc.co.uk/join and use the code HONEST5. (Disclaimer: if you join Honest John receives a small fee).
Ask Honest John
Can I retrofit cruise control to an MGF?
Can I fit LED headlights?
Is a 1998 MGF Abingdon a rare car?
Which budget two-seater classic sports car would you suggest?
Model History
- April 1985: Austin Rover design office begins work on a new sporting MG
- September 1989: From concept to reality
- January 1990: Work begins on chosing the engineering layout of the PR3
- January 1991: Mid-engined PR3 chosen for production
- May 1991: MG F comes in-house
- March 1995: MGF launched
- March 1997: New options added
- September 1999: MGF facelifted
- March 2000: Steptronic transmission added
- May 2001: Range extended
- December 2001: MGF production ended - replaced by steel-sprung MG TF
April 1985
Austin Rover design office begins work on a new sporting MG
The MG F-16 looked reasonably similar to the eventual MGF but it was actually front engined and front wheel drive. The body formed the basis of the later PR1, PR2 and PR3 prototypes - and therefore, can be considered the point at which the 'F was born...
Between 1985 and 1989, work on a neat little front-engined two-seater convertible, called the MG F-16 showed that many within Austin Rover were keen on re-entering the sports car market. The reasoning behind the car was simple: MG as a marque was ripe to be exploited, and what better way to do it than to develop a new sports car; something to finally replace the MGB? Although, the F-16 was never much more than a rolling design study, fashioned in the sidelines, it certainly softened management’s attitude to the idea of a new MG-badged sports car. All the designers were extremely keen to follow through the concept; especially their director – Roy Axe.
The background to why the development of this car never really gained momentum throughout the last half of the decade can be put down to uncertainty over the company’s finances, the failure of the mid-range saloons on the market – and the government’s keenness to farm out Rover to private sector. The new MG convertible was not regarded a priority in Rover’s forward planning and although the F16 was advanced enough to have been mocked-up as a full-size prototype, management approval was not forthcoming.
However, the idea never went away and given the right climate, a two-seater MG convertible would make a return. After the sale of the Rover Group to British Aerospace in 1988, the climate began to look more favourable, and many within the design team did believe that the F-16 concept could make the leap to production reality. in 1989, there was finally light at the end of the tunnel and thanks to the improved financial position of Rover, the MG idea began to gain momentum right the way through the company. The pivotal moment in the gestation of the MGF came later in 1989, when the Japanese launched their modern interpretation of the Lotus Elan.
Upon seeing the Mazda MX-5 for the first time, Gordon Sked knew that the designers had been right all along in pushing for a new MG convertible. It was obviously a bitter-sweet moment for him, and he has been quoted as saying that the MX-5′s announcement made him feel like crying. There was an obvious reason for this – work on the F-16 had been underway at Canley since 1985 – and had the company given the project its blessing, they could have had the car (or a derivative of it) on the market before the Mazda ever saw the light of day. Thanks to the MX-5, the world had now changed – for the better – but it meant that any manufacturer who launched a mass-market 2-seater convertible subsequently would undoubtedly be accused of jumping on the MX-5 bandwagon.
However, the MX-5 had appeared and following the critical acclaim it received in the press, Rover management had no doubt that they needed to produce an MG to compete in the same market. The Mazda’s sales success in the months that followed backed that up… The MG was on.
September 1989
From concept to reality
The final piece of the MGF jigsaw was the formation of Rover Special Products. The raison d’etre of this division was simply to take on Rover Group projects that were considered too marginal for the mainstream design teams to consider working on. RSP was manna from heaven for the new MG, simply because it allowed for much in the way of flexibility during the design process without actually taking too many resources away from the mainstream design team, who were busy working on upcoming Rover saloons and hatchbacks.
As a result, the project was given some direction, and a commitment to production looked much more likely. An overall designation of, ‘Phoenix Revival’ (or ‘Phoenix Route’) was assigned, and in an exercise to work out what was the best route to follow in devising the new car, three subsequent MG convertible prototypes would be given PR designations.
January 1990
Work begins on chosing the engineering layout of the PR3
Under the direction of Rover Special Projects division, the PR3 project was designed and developed by Steve Harper, during the first months of 1991. The design theme, inspired by the TWR XJR15, was first sketched in the January of 1991, and then developed over the next month, in which time, the distinct shape of the MGF was soon established. Full size clay modelling began in March, and the ‘red car’ was first shown to Rover management that same month.
| PR1 | This was a continuation of the F16 project, being front engined, front wheel drive. Motor Panels built the running prototype and based it upon Maestro running gear, but using the 2-litre M16 engine. |  |
|---|---|---|
| PR2 | PR2 was built by Reliant on a Scimitar SS1 chassis. Layout was classical – front engine, rear wheel drive and the power was provided by a 3.9-litre version of the venerable Rover V8 engine. |  |
| PR3 | PR3 was produced by the Luton-based automotive consultants ADC and was a mid/rear design, echoing the layout of the Fiat X1/9 and Toyota MR2. |  |
The PR1/2/3 exercise was an extremely astute one: outside contractors were used in order to keep costs down, and each of the three parties were given an F-16 body to work with and a mechanical configuration to adhere to.
Within the space of a few months, RSP had received the finished prototypes from Reliant, ADC and Motor Panels, and serious evaluation of the road behaviour of each one ensued. Each car had its fans within the company, but it was decided that the best way to settle the issue would be to undertake and management drive exercise, in which the three cars would be seriously tested back-to-back.
One attendee was John Towers, who was there in his role as Director of Product Development. The exercise was most interesting, for all those that attended, and although the build quality of the prortypes was a little rough and ready in places, a good impression of each car could be reached. Although technically very interesting, PR1 was the first to be ruled out, because of its front wheel drive layout. It was felt that although it offered an extremely competent compromise in the handling department, its reliance on the Maestro floorpan meant that it would be running on soon-to-be-obsolete componentry.
The choice was, therefore, between the hairy 3.9-litre rear wheel drive car, and the more sophisticated mid-engined layout. Both layouts had their adherents, but in the end, the more forward looking of the two was chosen…
After much deliberation, RSP settled on the mid-engined layout for the new car, dubbed the PR3, because of the superior road behaviour offered by the layout – this was in the days before the Lotus Elan proved once and for all that front wheel drive cars could be made to handle as well as their rear wheel drive counterparts. Previous MG Midget and F16 prototypes may have been front engine/front wheel drive, but that was because of the ease of employing existing running gear. Although the front engine/rear wheel drive option had its fans inside Special Products, it was ruled out on cost grounds: a mid-engined car could use an existing engine/gearbox package without major modification, whereas a rear driven car would require an entirely new platform and running gear.
January 1991
Mid-engined PR3 chosen for production
MGA Development’s styling mock-up for the PR3, dating back to 1991 shows that the MGF package was already pretty much defined: the mid-engined layout, body shape survived through to the final model.
Out of the three companies. MGA Development’s version was deemed the most suitable by management, and it was from this proposal that the final MGF shape was created. The design brief given by Rover was open – there needed to be a conceptual relationship with the MG EX-E, as well as more contemporary rival convertibles. It also needed to be unmistakably an MG, with an overall feeling of Britishness. Rover’s management reviewed MGA’s PR3 proposal and liked what they saw: Steve Harper, a member of the team that worked on the PR3 for MGA recalled their reaction, ‘The feedback we got was very positive. The high rear deck went down well, as did the bodyside surfacing and the car’s squat stance, but the front end treatment drew some criticism – too anonymous, not MG.’
May 1991
MG F comes in-house
By May 1991, MGA signed off their PR3 proposal and passed it over to Canley for final productionsation by EX-E stylist, Gerry McGovern and Gordon Sked. Many subtle changes were made at this stage of the process – the windscreen became lower, flanks were lowered and the overhangs shortened. Significantly, major changes were made to the front of the car, where fuller, rounder headlights were incorporated and a traditional MG grille arrangement that aped the post-1976 MGB. Happily, the Gerry McGovern arrangement was considerably more stylish than the rather heavy-handed original.
So the styling was an amalgam of new-age thinking and traditional MG design cues, the engineering and concept owed nothing at all to any previous production cars by the marque. The MG ADO21 and EX-E may have shared its mid-engined layout, but neither was anywhere near being a production reality.
Gerry McGovern sketch shows clearly that the MGA PR3 was a suitable starting point, but major changes to the overall appearance of the car would result from his alterations. Clearly evident from this rendering is the striking similarity to the EX-E of 1985 – especially to the rear of the hard top version.
So thanks to Rover’s insistence that the PR3 was to be as British as bangers and mash, it was heart warming to see that the Rover parts bin was raided – and no Honda at all crept into the design, a temptation for any Rover engineer during the early 1990s. There was only one choice for the power unit: the K-series engine, but surprising for observers, the suspension used was Dr Alex Moulton’s Hydragas – hardly an obvious choice, given the cars in which it was previously used.
But Hydragas worked especially well with the mid-engined MG because it could be tuned specifically to provide accurate response during direction changes, without being too nervy. As Alex Moulton related in Autocar magazine at the launch of the MGF, “it de-fidgets the car” because of its best property – the front/rear connection. Being short of wheelbase, the car was potentially very susceptible to becoming unsettled on rough surfaces – but the interconnected MG suffered far less than its rivals.
Hood up or down, the profile of the MGF looked good – the low profile hood was engineered by Pininfarina, the only part of this roadster that could be construed as not being British.
The 1.8-litre version of the K-series engine is an engine that was never originally designed for. As has been relayed elsewhere in this book, the K-series engine was an optimised package for installation in small and medium sized hatchbacks – and as a result, it was an extremely compact power unit. However, Rover Group Powertrain were faced with the pressing need to replace the bought-in Honda 1.6-litre engines – and as a result of this need, the big block K-series was born. Some very ingenious engineering solutions were employed to squeeze extra capacity from the K-series engine, chief of these were new cylinder liners, called damp liners, which allowed an increased cylinder size by fitting bigger bores into the same block size. The result was four cylinders squeezed into the same size block – a longer throw crankshaft effected the enlargement from 1.6 to 1.8-litres. Continuing Rover’s loaves and fishes reputation, the entire budget for the engine programme was, ‘less than £200 million’.
For the faster version of the MGF various methods of boosting engine power were investigated. Alex Stephenson, Rover Group Powertrain’s managing director stated, ‘we looked at everything, including turbos and superchargers, but VVC offered the best package…’ Basically, Variable Valve Control (VVC) was a concept that Rover had been working on since the launch of the K-series engine in 1989. Under the codename Hawk, the intention was to boost power by continuously varying the inlet cam period – and this was finally achieved in their first development engine, run in 1993.
The secret to the VVC system was a clever mechanical link between the inlet camshaft and its drive – the engine management system altered the relationship between the camshaft and crankshaft. The result was that at high revs, the valves were held open to boost power, but at low revs, the valves remained closed longer, thus increasing torque. The step-over point was at 4000rpm, it all meant that VVC enabled versions of the K-series exhibited the likeable quality of being nicely torquey and driveable at low revs, but when you wanted to press-on, the power would come in gradually above 4000rpm. The effect was somewhat akin that that of the Honda VTEC engine, but with the advantage of having better low-down torque characteristics.
March 1995
MGF launched
When the MGF was launched on 8 March 1995, the impact it made on the press and public was significant. Following over a decade of Rover’s Anglo-Japanese products, RV8 aside, here was the first all-British car produced by Rover since the Austin Montego. And as Car magazine related at the time, ‘even more heart-warming is that some of the people involved with it are figures from some of the happier chapters of BL’s troubled past. Dr Alex Moulton, engineer Brian Griffin is the son of Charles Griffin, once the engineering chief of Austin-Morris. Peter Parker, who worked on MG’s variable-valve-control system, cut his teeth on Austin’s experimental gas-turbine cars.’
The press loved the car – and the MGF was soon making friends in the showrooms, too. The MG was welcomed back into the realms of mainstream sports cars – sales were brisk and the car enjoyed a very positive image. Following the launch of the Rover 200 and 400, the MGF soon became a member of the Rover “Niche” line-up, which included the 200 Cabriolet, Coupe and Tourer – and it began to win new custom for the company. Certainly, the MGF compared with the then current crop of opposition, which included the FIAT Barchetta and Mazda MX-5. Where the MGF scored heavily against both cars was because of its mid-engined layout and cuddly, but sexy looks.
Autocar were impressed with the new car and it showed in their road test verdict of the 1.8i version: “It would have been so easy for Rover to stick an MG badge on the nose of a mediocre car and once more rely on the marque’s image to do the selling. This has not happened. Rover has instead created what is, in all probability, the world’s most complete and affordable open two-seater. From traditional MG fans to those wanting something more stylish than the chopped-about hatchbacks that pass for convertibles these days, the MGF should prove a blessing. It is an all-British car of which we can be unusually proud.”
The interior may not have been quite as avant-garde as the exterior, but it was certainly a successful effort. The “twin cabin” theme managed to look both interesting and cohesive – the cream dials also added visual interest to the fascia.
Handling and ride were marked as being exemplary – and although as a mid-engined car with its low polar movement of inertia, it should have been more ragged at its limits and it was not. Rover’s engineers had engineered a massive safety margin into the chassis, and ensured that the MGF was all-but impossible to oversteer, let alone spin. However, the Hydragas sprung chassis did exactly what Moulton promised – it “de-fidgeted” the car. The downside was that along with the electric power steering, it managed to desensitise the car a little too much. OK, the limits of adhesion were way beyond cars such as the Mazda MX-5, but that all-important feel was a little bit muddied. This may have been disappointing to the road testers, but as ex-Formula One driver Mark Blundell put it when speaking about the MGF, ‘I feel, for the average driver, that this is much safer because you can back off the throttle and bring in the front end, as opposed to trying to use a lot of ability to catch it.’
Russell Bulgin put it in these terms when comparing the MGF to its arch-rival, the Mazda MX-5: ‘The MGF is for chaps, the MX-5 is a bloke’s car. Chaps like to reminisce about the MGB, talk about their purchase down at the pub. All a bloke craves is a quiet road with some invigorating bends and the odd off-camber surprise. So why have Rover been clever with the MGF? Because there’s a strong argument for saying that, to the everyday user, the MX-5 is too much sports car. The MGF feels amiable for commuting and would be a great motorway companion, too. Roomy inside, with a decent boot and a civility, which is more than skin-deep, this is a sports car for the driver who isn’t too sure about sports cars. Is satisfying that person such a terrible mistake for Rover to make?’
Of course, the answer was no – and sales of the MGF backed this opinion.
Unfortunately, plans for exporting it to the USA were put on ice by BMW, who felt that it would threaten their own newly launched Z3 model. The company cited homologation costs as a reason, but engineering the MGF to be as user-friendly as it was points to a development programme aimed squarely at the US market – and BMW did not want their British division to spoil the party.
MGF Trophy 160 signalled the company’s new found sporting intent.
March 1997
New options added
Air conditioning became a very expensive but desirable option in early 1997 and other options offered from launch included CD multiplay, fog lamps and passenger airbag as well as a factory produced hardtop with glass rear window and heating element. The following should help the buyer get the correct specification car. All models are fitted with alloy wheels.
VVCs differ from the 1.8Mpi as follows:
° Five spoke alloy wheels (1995–2000)
° Electric Power steering (EPAS) optional on 1.8Mpi
° Boot mounted additional brake lamp, standard on both from 1998
° Half leather seats
° VVC stamped on plenum chamber visible through boot grille
° Eighth digit of VIN should read T for VVC and G for Mpi version
° Rev counter red lined at 7250rpm, and 6750rpm on 1.8Mpi
September 1999
MGF facelifted
Facelifted for the 2000MY in late 1999, the exterior has body coloured windscreen surround in place of black and the side and front indicators are clear smoked with orange bulbs instead of orange lenses.The interior has revised switchgear, optional lighter interior trim colours and the speedometer and rev counter are silvered with italicised numerals. The mileometer and odometer are digital.
March 2000
Steptronic transmission added
In 2000 a Belgian built CVT transmission was offered, mated to the 118bhp engine. It offered fully automatic mode or steering wheel mounted F1 paddle shift that makes the gearbox operate as a six speed sequential gearbox.
May 2001
Range extended
In 2001, two further models were launched to compliment the 1.8Mpi, Steptronic and VVC. These being the Trophy160 SE and the 1.6 Mpi base model.
The Trophy has a reworked VVC engine producing 158bhp and is distinguishable by 16-inch alloy wheels, front bib splitter and boot spoiler. The suspension has been lowered and is stiffer: AP racing ‘MG’ branded red coloured four-pot brake callipers working with much larger front brake discs. Body colours include solar red, anthracite and trophy yellow and trophy blue. The interior is colour coded to match the chosen exterior colour. Steel spare wheel optional on this model.
The 1.6 was launched as an entry level base model which is fitted with a short stroke version of the 1.8 engine, and equipped with more basic interior trim, It is nevertheless an affordable entry into sports car motoring and will be enough to satisfy many.
December 2001
MGF production ended - replaced by steel-sprung MG TF
Additionally, there were several special editions available throughout the production life of car including the Abingdon, 75th Anniversary and Freestyle.Plans were already afoot to thoroughly update the MGF, though – and in January 2002, the results were launched: the MG TF.
Driving MG MGF (1995 – 2002)
The MGF was developed on a budget that might just have kept BMW's staff canteen in Munich in Bratwurst for a couple of weeks, and using a raft of components dug out of the Rover parts bin, it arrived at the height of the roadster boom of the mid-1990s, and proved a rather profitable venture for the company. Yes, its critics may dismissively describe the MGFas little more than a back-to-front Metro with a big engine in it, but after a recent re-visit, it's difficult not to come to the conclusion that the Rover engineers were pretty good at re-cooking their meat 'n' two veg into something rather spicy...
Take a look at the styling, and time has been kind to the MGF- the organic curves may be a little out of fashion right now, but that doesn't stop it being balanced and characterful. Considering it's mid-engined, non-car people would be hard-pressed to tell that you actually sit in front of the powertrain. Fans of Italian supercars might think that's a bit of a waste - but low-scuttled wedge designs and Metro front bulkheads don't really mix. So, given that compromise, you have to conclude that Gerry McGovern and his colleagues made a great job of the MGF.
The running gear's a masterclass in stirring the pot - Metro Hydragas interconnected suspension, K-Series engines, offered initially in 1.8-litre form, but expanded to include the VVC cylinder head, and a bunch of R8 and R17 interior parts. For someone into 1990s Rovers, it makes the MGFa delightful place to sit. However, the chassis engineers developed it into something rather special - and if you're worried about the idea of a Hydragas suspended sportscar, then fear ye not... once you get your head around the idea, and actually drive it, you'll be pretty pleased...
Performance and Economy
Okay, so at 1087kg, the MGF is no lightweight - and there are plenty of sporting hatchbacks with plenty more muscle and trimmer bodies that will leave it for dead in a straight line, but that's not what this car is about. It's no cruiser, either - slightly frantic gearing and a peaky engine means you'll not be slogging at low speeds in a high gear in the pursuit of effortless progress.
No, the MGF is a car that you actively have to work at to make decent progress in - and that pays penalties at the pumps. Cars of this nature are supposed to be easy on the pocket, but 30mpg's about the best you can expect if you like to go quickly. But for most owners, who have chosen on as their second car, that's probably not the handicap it would normally be.
In a straight line, it's quick enough, though. Thanks to excellent traction off the line, 60mph comes up in 8.7 seconds, and the top speed is a respectable (for its 118bhp power output) 123mph. In the real world, a mildly quick turbo diesel will leave it far behind on the motorway, but factor in traction exiting corners or roundabouts, and the sheer amount of lateral grip available (in the dry) and the MGFmore than holds its own.
Handling and Ride
The MGFis a compact and wieldy car and that means you'll enjoy hustling it through bends. That's pretty obvious really - it's fairly low and the engine's mid-mounted, resulting in near-perfect weight distribution. However, what will surprise - and hopefully delight - is the excellent ride quality. Okay, it's no Rover 75, but we'd compare it favourably with a number of newer family hatchbacks in terms of control and softness.
However, that relatively compliant ride and well-controlled damping doesn't lead to rolly-poly cornering - like many Hydragas suspended cars, it's flat in bends too. For anyone with a pre-2005 MG TF, a ride up a rough B-Road will be an enlightning experience, in fact, a bit of a revelation. In fact, it's only the scuttle shake and associated rattles that will really ruffle you - not the boneshaking ride normally associated with such cars.
You'll be able to tackle your average cross country run at enormous speed as a result - unhindered by the crashiness and joggling you might expect from contemporary rivals, and be egged on by the sheer amount of lateral grip on offer. In fact, it all seems rather effortless, and you'll only realise you're mullering the road you're on by the speed you catch (and pass) the cars around you.
In the wet, it can't bend the laws of physics, though - and snap oversteer can turn into a very nasty spin... so be careful when playing.
In short, the rough and tumble of the city streets shouldn't be too much of an inconvenience, rough roads are pretty much shrugged off - aside from when the short wheelbase conspires against you, and motorways are a stable and four-square planted affair...
At the wheel
Is this place special enough for you?
Although it wouldn't be correct to describe the MGF's interior as anything other than functional and a little drab in the industrial greys and blacks of our car, there's a certain style that will endear it to AR readers. You'll be clasping an R8 steering wheel, twiddling R17 knobs and peering into Metro/100 rear view mirrors - making this a sportscar that you'll feel quickly at home in and not at all intimidated by. Some aspects of the ergonomics are exasperating, such as the electric window and foglamp switch placement, and you'll be wondering at what the point of some of the tiny storage compartments actually is.
The controls themselves are generally good to use though. The EPAS steering is overlight and slightly undergeared, and long term ownership might be more enjoyable with the fuse pulled out; also the gearchange lacks the snickety-snick of a Mazda MX-5, and the brakes don't seem to have much initial bite. The seating position's also a bit on the high side too - and there's no real reason for this, other than making the MGFnew-car test-drive friendly.
But these are small niggles, and within a few miles, you'll be feeling confident and happy.
Finish and equipment
Hood down, the TF looks good...
As explained previously, there's an awful lot of carry-over equipment in the MGF, and to the sanitized fingertips of your average 21st century car enthusiast brought up on soft-feel plastic and damped grab handles, it probably feels a little low-rent. But don't be fooled, because it's all solid and functional - even if it's unglamorous. The hood itself is elegantly simple, well engineered, and you'll get it up and down just as quickly as your average C+C poseur, but without all the weight and complexity.
It would be nice if there had been a glass rear window from the beginning (2005MY TFs received one - too little, too late), and the exposed mechanism of the single skinned hood looks a little quaint - but don't let that put you off. Not at the money these cars are now fetching...
...and it's not too bad hood up, either. Open to closed is a 20-second job if you don't rush it...
Verdict
The MGFhas developed a bit of a reputation for being a nail-technician's car - and we're not entirely sure why. After all, it's a good drive and you can't depend on it as a day to day conveyance (just Google the term 'MGF breakdown' if you don't believe us. As 1990s cars go, this is probably as close as you'll get to a fully-fledged classic car right now, because an MGF needs constant care and attention - you cannot just get in and thrash it in the way you can, say, a Mazda MX-5 - and for those who do, MGF ownership is a frustrating and ultimately expensive experience.
At today's prices, it's something of a steal too - as long as you find a loved one that you know has been in the hands of an understanding owner. And you have access to a specialist who knows their way round an MGF. If you do, and you can live with its peccadilloes, then you'll enjoy a car that is quite outstanding in what it can do considering the parts that went into it.
If not, walk away and don't look back... we'll understand completely.
Ultra-modern when launched, but in many ways harking back to the style pioneered by the rubber-bumpered MGB...
MG MGF (1995 – 2002) Buying Guide
Buyer's Guide
What to look for
Engine and transmission:
K-Series engines are strong and love to rev and as far as Co2 emissions go they are very green. First seen in the Metro in 1.4 guise, the engine has been progressively enlarged and improved. The Dohc K-Series was the mainstay of the MG Rover product range and was developed into the KV6 fitted to the Rover 75 and MG ZT ranges. The K1.8 engine has damp liners (where which half of the liner is dropped into the block, and half is cooled by coolant) to give extra capacity and is fitted with a stronger crankshaft and lighter pistons. It is very smooth and flexible.
The entire engine is completely aluminium with the head bolts reaching down to secure the sump. Oil leaks are very rare and if present, should be viewed with some concern. Cambelts need to be changed at 60,000 miles or five years whichever is the earlier, usually the latter as most MGF’s are used as second cars. There are two belts on a VVC engine and although difficult to change, documented evidence of this repair, which is part of a five hundred pound annual service, should be available to the buyer if the car is over five years old.
Check the dipstick under the flap in the boot to determine the state of the oil. If it is coffee coloured, then the head gasket has failed All engines should fire easily and idle at 850rpm when warm. They should be eager to accelerate without any flat spots and should not misfire or cut out. The water temperature should be just below half way on the gauge and no warning lights should be illuminated when driving. The engine should quickly attain normal working temperature.
The manual PG1 gearbox is strong and has a close set of ratios, but is notchy until the oil is warmed. It is advisable to change the gearbox oil on a biannual basis to maintain a slick shift. The control cables for the gear linkage can break and although awkward to replace, necessitating the removal of the centre console assembly, are again achievable by the enthusiastic owner with the aid of proper tools and a workshop manual.
The clutch replacement is a major job on most modern cars and the MGFis no exception, however many owners cover high mileage’s without trouble to this item. It is a hydraulically actuated self-adjusting unit.
Selecting reverse is best achieved by selecting a forward gear first to slow down the input shaft, which will prevent a graunching gear. This is quite normal. All gears should select easily and not ‘jump out’ The clutch is robust and checking for wear is just like any other car. Steptronic versions should shift up and down in a seamless fashion.
Suspension, steering and brakes
The MGFsuspension is Hydragas connected to all four wheels and damped by shock absorbers. It is indeed derived from the highly successful Metro as at the time development money was tight. The system allows for good predictable handling and roadholding without compromising passenger comfort. Indeed the car offers a very supple ride. Problems occur when owners fail to deal with a leaking unit or have the gas released to effect a lower ride height. This is not good practice.
There are three ways of lowering the MGFand as can be seen, none of these methods should be undertaken by anyone other than a Hydragas specialist - and one that should never be undertaken at all:
Release fluid pressure: The same happens to a car sitting lower due to neglect. This will lead to probably lower ride with difficult to define stiffness, but can give very dangerous handling on rebound movements of the wheels, when the gas-membrane covers and closes the damper openings in the Hydragas-units. The stiffness of the setup can vary with the amount of fluid released and one may even end up with a softer suspension!
Shorten the knuckles, which actuate the Hydragas-units: A popular and safe conversion, which leaves one thing usually desired: The car will only get lower, but the suspension will not get any harder! So the soft setup with shorter wheel travels will lead to a car hitting the bump stops more often, being uncomfortable in the extreme. But not dangerous as the stiffness overall is not affected and clearly defined.
A combination of reworked Hydragas units: Different fluid pressure and probably (not necessary) shortened knuckle-joints... there have been Hydragas units on offer with lower gas-pressure, leading to a stiffer setup where the fluid pressure can be dropped slightly to gain a lower ride height. But this is really something for experts...
There are specialists who can pump up the suspension but mostly the work is carried out by the Rover franchised dealer network.
Check the suspension ride height (tape measure required for a crude on the spot check it should be about 368 ± 10 mm at 17C measured from the centre of the wheel to the wheel arch lip vertically above it). Too high or too low may upset the suspension balance, and lead to premature tyre wear. Also, whilst performing this check, does the car sit level? There is nothing more irritating than a lop-sided car.
The steering is rack and pinion like most other cars today, a system, which offers low maintenance and very precise feel to it. The VVC and cars that have optional power steering fitted are protected by an underbonnet 70amp fuse fitted on the right hand side of the inner wing. Some owners disconnect it to improve the steering feel. The power assistance uses an electric motor mounted to the steering column, (the EPAS ECU derives the assistance required from the vehicle speed, and turning torque on the steering wheel, in order to give the correct assistance - or what it thinks is correct) which greatly reduces the use of engine power over the traditional hydraulic power steering pump. The steering firms up at speed to and gives greatest driving assistance at low and parking speeds.
All MGFs have four-wheel power assisted disc brakes with vented discs at the front wheel and solid discs at the rear wheels. Maximum brake size on MGF’s using standard 15-inch wheels is 280mm. But the AP racing set up used on the Trophy 160SE variant use a 304mm brake discs - this needs to be used in conjunction with suitable 16-inch wheels. As with all cars, a close look at the disc condition through the alloy wheel will tell you a lot about how it has been driven.
Today’s brake pads have no asbestos content and are generally much harder; therefore the disc itself wears and has to be replaced. Often this will manifest itself as a judder when braking from speed. Apart from that, braking should be progressive without any pulling to one side. Handbrake warning lights can sometimes stick on and the cable would need adjustment in this case.
Tyres and wheels:
Check the condition of the tyres. In addition to the tread depth there should be no excess wear on outer or inner edges of the tyre tread. This would indicate incorrect tracking or suspension height setting and would highlight a car that has had a hard life with sporadic servicing. Check also condition of tyre walls and wheel rims to see if the car has been kerbed frequently indicating a careless previous owner.
Cooling system:
MGFs get an undeserved bad press because of Head gasket failure.
Many owners are ignorant of how the cooling system works and run the system low or have poor quality maintenance, which results in incorrect cooling system bleeding to eradicate air. Air within the cooling system would create localised hot spots in the engine and would almost certainly blow the gasket, which is of course a safety valve to prevent major engine damage.
Firstly when looking at a used MGF, you should check the radiator expansion tank to look for a correctly filled tank with a good green colour anti freeze. Other than this would indicate a problem. Have a look underneath the car to check the condition of underfloor cooling pipes. These travel the length of the car from the radiator to the engine.
When driving the car, be sure to reach working engine temperature and park leaving the engine running. After a few minutes at ambient temperatures, the fans should cut in to cool the engine. There is a fan inside the engine bay and this can be heard on the driver’s side of the car. It is designed to cool the ancillary components within the engine bay. The other fan is mounted next to the radiator; this should cut in dependant on temperature and heating system usage. Rare A/c equipped cars have two fans that work together or singly dependent upon conditions.
Body and chassis:
This is a sportscar and many owners will have driven them hard and fast. Some cars will have visited hedges or contacted other cars during the course of their lives. Rust or paint bubbles indicate poor repair as generally the car, even the 1995 models are rust free. Look for good panel fits, which should be parallel, all round. Check for signs of overspray on the hood, wheel arch liners or exhaust indicating accident damage repairs.
Exhaust:
Check for the sound of rattling or blowing exhausts. They generally last a long time, as there is a very short run from the engine to the silencer box. Complete replacement systems are around £200 with long life stainless steel ones costing c£300.
Interior and hood:
If the car is fitted with a hard top, see if you can have it removed to assess the hood fit and condition. The hood is simple to fold and erect, so any difficulties suggest a bent frame indicating very careless use or even an accident. Plastic rear windows should be checked to ensure that they are not cracked and the hood fabric should free from rips or tears. All are available as replacements and budget for a hood around £400 and a rear window around £100. Many owners will have replaced the cloth seats with leather on the 1.8Mpi, and this is a desirable specification to have.
The interior should be dry and in good condition. Damp musty smells are a sign of a leaky hood or window where it meets the hood. Left untreated the resultant moisture could create rust in the footwells. If there is a smell of petrol, walk away! This problem is very difficult to diagnose and rectify.
Electrical system:
Check that electric window motors work smoothly without jarring and also the central locking system. Pressing the lock plip on the handset twice will actuate the deadlocks. Check that all instruments work whilst on a roadtest. SRS warning light on all the time could be something a simple as a poorly connected wire under the drivers seats, (or passenger seat if two airbags fitted).
Summary
The car is generally reliable but will benefit from an enthusiastic owner who will foresee any problems by preventative planned maintenance. MGFs are either bought by people who use them sparingly or are bought and modified and thrashed on a daily basis. There are plenty of cars to choose from so avoid the latter and look around carefully. Whether you buy a 1.6 or a Trophy will depend wholly upon your needs and finances. They will all deliver motoring pleasure and are inexpensive to maintain and have especially low depreciation
The most popular colours are British racing green, solar red, silver and Tahiti blue. The least popular colours are white, alumina green and gold. But don’t let me put you off one of these if the car is the right one for you.
Care of the soft-top is advisable and a thorough clean at the start of the year followed up with a coating of waterproof lacquer will pay dividends. Look out for a good used hardtop, as it will make a world of difference to the motoring you do in the cold winter months.
Whether you buy a Steptronic version is your personal choice, but CVTs offer an unusual driving sensation that many find at odds with the MGF's sporting brief. So, as the automatic MGB was not popular, it follows that the automatic MGFwill also not be popular. Small sportscars should be manual to gain the most driver involvement.
The MGF represents great value for money and is a technically competent package. Do join a club and learn from other owners. It may enhance your social life as well. Buy a good one and maintain and cherish it, and you will have a car which will reward you every time you drive it.
With thanks to Tony Harrison for compiling this article; and Alexander Boucke and Brian Gunn for their additions.
