RE: Shed Of The Week: MG TF

[B'stard Child]

chris watton said:

Malachimon said:

B'stard Child said:

Err - they are decades older, have a prehistoric asthmatic engine, cart spring suspension, frequently driven by old people with hats and most have rust covered by body filler and paint

True but they are more fun to drive cheaper to run, far better looking, loaded with character and have a much better ability to charm people.

Even if it is slow and old

You forgot to add:

'In my opinion'.

Sorry - I'll remember that next time

Actually isn't any forum post an opinion already so it doesn't really need to be stated

[anonymous-user]

AW111 said:

We know that you personally can fix any k-series in half an hour for pennies, while all other mechanics are hopeless fools. You tell us on any thread that mentions k-series'.

In this part of the world, British cars have not sold in any quantity since the 70's, and I don't think we saw any modern MG's apart from the F / TF. There are quite a few Land/Range rovers about; occasionally you will even see one off the bitumen, but rarely.

Ignore him, he might go away...that's what most everybody else does.

[chris watton]

B'stard Child said:

Sorry - I'll remember that next time

Actually isn't any forum post an opinion already so it doesn't really need to be stated

My post was aimed at Malachimon.

[Malachimon]

chris watton said:

You forgot to add:

'In my opinion'.

True but I'm not sure I know anyone who would say the MGF is better looking than say a 60s MGB GT

[Skyedriver]

So what would I need to do to one of these to make it a class leader contender in the up to 2000cc roadgoing class at Harewood Hillclimb.
No lightening except boot & bonnet, race seat allowed, tyres fron 1A.
Guess a 160 is top of the list (160bhp?) but would dropping the pressures on the hydrogas be easier/cheaper than new springs/shocks....

[MGJohn]

yonex said:

AW111 said:

We know that you personally can fix any k-series in half an hour for pennies, while all other mechanics are hopeless fools. You tell us on any thread that mentions k-series'.

In this part of the world, British cars have not sold in any quantity since the 70's, and I don't think we saw any modern MG's apart from the F / TF. There are quite a few Land/Range rovers about; occasionally you will even see one off the bitumen, but rarely.

Ignore him, he might go away...that's what most everybody else does.

Speaking for most everybody else again! Another plonker comment from you...

There again I might not go away.

I have not forgotten your miserable replies to some of my previous efforts. Including stating you did not believe me when I stated I bought this car for a tenner which I did.



Yeah I know, I was robbed. Have you ever been known to give anyone any credit where due except yourself of course! I'm sure your surfeit of negative misery is appreciated by "most everybody". What a misery!

[MGJohn]

Skyedriver said:

So what would I need to do to one of these to make it a class leader contender in the up to 2000cc roadgoing class at Harewood Hillclimb.
No lightening except boot & bonnet, race seat allowed, tyres fron 1A.
Guess a 160 is top of the list (160bhp?) but would dropping the pressures on the hydrogas be easier/cheaper than new springs/shocks....

Best to search on those sites which specialise in these cars and their engines. PH is largely stoney ground and all that where these cars and their engines are concerned.

[s m]

Skyedriver said:

So what would I need to do to one of these to make it a class leader contender in the up to 2000cc roadgoing class at Harewood Hillclimb.
No lightening except boot & bonnet, race seat allowed, tyres fron 1A.
Guess a 160 is top of the list (160bhp?) but would dropping the pressures on the hydrogas be easier/cheaper than new springs/shocks....

MG TF had normal shocks/springs instead of Hydragas

[gigglebug]

MadDog1962 said:

Hmmm... Well it is a roadworthy rag-top for less than a grand. As long as we don't start comparing the MG F with more successful designs e.g. MX-5 etc it looks OK I suppose. A friend of mine in Australia has had 2 of 'em precisely because they're the cheapest way he can buy his wife a convertible.

However, there must be something better as SOTW.

4 out of 10 Mr Shed. Must try harder.

Any suggestions then?? The same comment comes every week without seemingly any thought put into it. Exactly what would you expect for under a grand if this is only a 4 out of 10 car, a Boxter, Z4 or maybe a Ferrari 360?? It's a 2 seat sports car which was regarded as a decent steer and is in (on the face of it) good condition and will be end up being a good chunk under the thousand pound mark. Could you give an example of a 10 out of 10 car for a grand please so we can all question your ability to pick?

[anonymous-user]

MGJohn said:

Speaking for most everybody else again! Another plonker comment from you...

There again I might not go away.

I have not forgotten your miserable replies to some of my previous efforts. Including stating you did not believe me when I stated I bought this car for a tenner which I did.

Yeah I know, I was robbed. Have you ever been known to give anyone any credit where due except yourself of course! I'm sure your surfeit of negative misery is appreciated by "most everybody". What a misery!

You're mistaking misery for boredom of your broken record. I'm all for cheap cars and running sheds but your myopic devotion to a long dead brand, whilst ridiculing neighbours, pro mechanics and anybody else who doesn't share your 'passion' of old rovers is as much hypocritical as it is sad. Can you tell us again about the bloke who thinks your car is a Honda, that one is just great for dinner parties, not to mention serious kudos online. I do wonder why a near 70 year old would spend his time like this but I gave up. Perhaps one day you'll get over your little englander mentality, time is running out though.....

[B'stard Child]

chris watton said:

B'stard Child said:

Sorry - I'll remember that next time

Actually isn't any forum post an opinion already so it doesn't really need to be stated

My post was aimed at Malachimon.

I know

[bencollins]

Nice car, about 8mpg better than Z3 or MX5 which has got to be important to folks who spend £1k on a car. Mainly due to the lack of differential, better engine and better aerodynamics esp drag and rear lift. Always liked stronger metallic colours on these, bright green/blue/red look fantastic. IMO the best styled accessible sportscar of the last 30 years. Like others have said, the HGF is hardly the end of the world and occurs on many types of car. One of the few convertibles that looks equally coherent with roof up or down. The coupe would have been nice, it always gets posted in these threads, so time to duly oblige the two people on PH who havent seen it..........



plus a nice random one from the inet:

[s m]

bencollins said:

Nice car, about 8mpg better than Z3 or MX5 which has got to be important to folks who spend £1k on a car. Mainly due to the lack of differential, better engine and better aerodynamics esp drag and rear lift. Always liked stronger metallic colours on these, bright green/blue/red look fantastic. IMO the best styled accessible sportscar of the last 30 years. Like others have said, the HGF is hardly the end of the world and occurs on many types of car. One of the few convertibles that looks equally coherent with roof up or down. The coupe would have been nice, it always gets posted in these threads, so time to duly oblige the two people on PH who havent seen it..........

Lack of differential? Do you mean propshaft?

[B'stard Child]

yonex said:

MGJohn said:

Speaking for most everybody else again! Another plonker comment from you...

There again I might not go away.

I have not forgotten your miserable replies to some of my previous efforts. Including stating you did not believe me when I stated I bought this car for a tenner which I did.

Yeah I know, I was robbed. Have you ever been known to give anyone any credit where due except yourself of course! I'm sure your surfeit of negative misery is appreciated by "most everybody". What a misery!

You're mistaking misery for boredom of your broken record. I'm all for cheap cars and running sheds but your myopic devotion to a long dead brand, whilst ridiculing neighbours, pro mechanics and anybody else who doesn't share your 'passion' of old rovers is as much hypocritical as it is sad. Can you tell us again about the bloke who thinks your car is a Honda, that one is just great for dinner parties, not to mention serious kudos online. I do wonder why a near 70 year old would spend his time like this but I gave up. Perhaps one day you'll get over your little englander mentality, time is running out though.....

Well ^ that is your opinion

Here's mine - I enjoy MGJohn's posts - they can often be educational and they are always enthusiastic towards his chosen favorite brand but isn't that a given for any car enthusiast, I think perhaps you should relax a little and if posts by MGJohn are starting to wind you up to a point where you write stuff like that then perhaps it would be better if you skimmed over them. This is exactly what I will do with your posts because they aren't very nice.

As for time running out I do hope that when I'm 70 I'm still enjoying working on my own cars just like I do now and there are PH'rs who appreciate sharing the experience.

JM2pW

Oh and one last point - MGJohn - please don't speak for others because I doubt you will be.

[chris watton]

bencollins said:

Nice car, about 8mpg better than Z3 or MX5 which has got to be important to folks who spend £1k on a car. Mainly due to the lack of differential, better engine and better aerodynamics esp drag and rear lift. Always liked stronger metallic colours on these, bright green/blue/red look fantastic. IMO the best styled accessible sportscar of the last 30 years. Like others have said, the HGF is hardly the end of the world and occurs on many types of car. One of the few convertibles that looks equally coherent with roof up or down.

This is one aspect that hardly ever mentioned, the fuel economy. The MGF Trophy 160 we have has been lightly tuned to 170bhp, and yet it's still the best for fuel economy out of our cars (granted, one is a TVR...) - and with the Quaife diff, it is such a hoot on the twisties.

[s m]

chris watton said:

bencollins said:

Nice car, about 8mpg better than Z3 or MX5 which has got to be important to folks who spend £1k on a car. Mainly due to the lack of differential, better engine and better aerodynamics esp drag and rear lift. Always liked stronger metallic colours on these, bright green/blue/red look fantastic. IMO the best styled accessible sportscar of the last 30 years. Like others have said, the HGF is hardly the end of the world and occurs on many types of car. One of the few convertibles that looks equally coherent with roof up or down.

This is one aspect that hardly ever mentioned, the fuel economy. The MGF Trophy 160 we have has been lightly tuned to 170bhp, and yet it's still the best for fuel economy out of our cars (granted, one is a TVR...) - and with the Quaife diff, it is such a hoot on the twisties.

Do the two types of Torsen ( that were on some of the fwd Rovers ) fit in the TF box as well?

[chris watton]

s m said:

Do the two types of Torsen ( that were on some of the fwd Rovers ) fit in the TF box as well?

I don't know, I just went for the Quaife ATB LSD, but I think they should..

[bencollins]

s m said:

bencollins said:

Nice car, about 8mpg better than Z3 or MX5 which has got to be important to folks who spend £1k on a car. Mainly due to the lack of differential, better engine and better aerodynamics esp drag and rear lift. Always liked stronger metallic colours on these, bright green/blue/red look fantastic. IMO the best styled accessible sportscar of the last 30 years. Like others have said, the HGF is hardly the end of the world and occurs on many types of car. One of the few convertibles that looks equally coherent with roof up or down. The coupe would have been nice, it always gets posted in these threads, so time to duly oblige the two people on PH who havent seen it..........

Lack of differential? Do you mean propshaft?

Fair enough, this is PH! propshaft and especially hypoid gear in a RWD differential that wastes energy changing direction 90dg.

[AW111]

s m said:

Lack of differential? Do you mean propshaft?

Transverse engine/gearbox packages tend to have lower driveline losses. Turning the drive through 90 degrees (longitudinal drive to axle) costs a bit of power in friction.
It's not the differental as such, but the bevel drive.

[MGJohn]

chris watton said:

s m said:

Do the two types of Torsen ( that were on some of the fwd Rovers ) fit in the TF box as well?

I don't know, I just went for the Quaife ATB LSD, but I think they should..

Irrespective of front or rear wheel drive, both the Type A and B Torsen Differentials should fit any PG1 Gearbox. That gearbox was fitted to a vast number of cars across the Rover and MG model range. As far as I am aware, the PG1 gearbox was fitted to all the MGF/TFs I have seen. They all have 1.8 engines. I do not know if the 1.6 MGF/TFs have the same box as the 1.8s. On the front wheel drive cars, 1.8s have the PG1 gearbox but 1.6 and 1.4 cars do not. Getrag ( Ford ? ) Gearbox used on the 1.6 Rover 45 I had some years ago.

The Type A Torsen Differential is weaker than the Type B. Type As are prone to sheer off its bearing journal when uprating the T-Series Turbocharged cars.