RE: Shed Of The Week: MG TF

RE: Shed Of The Week: MG TF

Author
Discussion

ianwayne

6,244 posts

267 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
I ran a 135 in 'look at me' yellow for 16 months 2011/12 with the 'sports' pack. Basically bigger 16" wheels and brakes and stiffer suspension. Enjoyed it, averaged 30 mpg easily.

Heater knobs very fragile and awkward to change. Mine has rusty subframes too advised on MoT. I'm 6 ft 2" and only just fit. Head touched the hood hoop if I leaned back. It leaked in at the top of the passenger window if you drove in the rain. Didn't go bang (previous head gasket change), only cost me £700 in 12 months including new rear brakes, tyres and depreciation in 4k miles. I'd have another but not this one. The 160 is the way to go.

My research pointed to the fact that the small amount of water in the engine is a major contributing factor, not necessarily chocolate head gaskets. In an average car losing 1 - 2 litres of coolant isn't catastrophic, in these it is. An earlier low water level warning is a good mod. The pipes running front to rear of the car can lose coolant very fast!

Motorrad

6,811 posts

186 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
They're good to drive, I got to have a crack at one on the Nurburgring and I was as fast in that as my RS2. Only problem is the fecking awful seating position for a taller driver although I guess that could be remedied somehow.

Hasbeen

2,073 posts

220 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
Can these things be the same things we got in Oz?

If so how can it be that you won't buy one here for less than $10,000?

Blackpuddin

16,409 posts

204 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
Hasbeen said:
you won't buy one here for less than $10,000?
eek

s m

23,164 posts

202 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
kambites said:
s m said:
So if you keep an eye on the coolant/coolant pipes they're no worse in an MG TF?
The biggest problem for the K-series seems to be stressing it from cold. The huge majority of engines that suffer from head gasket failure have never been run on low coolant.
So something like an oil temp gauge might be a good addition?

kambites

67,461 posts

220 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
s m said:
So something like an oil temp gauge might be a good addition?
I think coolant temperature is actually more than oil temperature for the head gasket, although obviously oil temperature is important in other ways. It's not wear you're trying to avoid, it's thermal shock.

roja27

4 posts

112 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
Looks reasonable to me, I bought an MGF last year for my wife for a stupidly low price with the muti layer gasket just fitted. I had heard all the horror stories about these cars but the price was to low to turn it down.
After nearly a year of ownership it has been a fantastic little car that loves to be redlined and is an absolute hoot on the country roads around my area. I am driving it more than my wife now just for the grin factor.


AW111

9,455 posts

132 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
kambites said:
At the time, it was arguably the best inline-four engine available for a small sports car (unless reliability was a particular priority). Hence companies like Caterham and Lotus using it.

<snip>
I think a few Japanese manufacturers might disagree...

Hainey

4,381 posts

199 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
The only brand new car I've ever test drove which had obvious faults, in this case a non functioning speedometer, was one of these. I think towards the end, even the Rover garages knew the writing was on the wall and just didn't care.

No denying these are a good steer when they work, but if you have to fix it yourself, you'll wish you'd bought an MX-5 when it borks. And it will.

kambites

67,461 posts

220 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
AW111 said:
kambites said:
At the time, it was arguably the best inline-four engine available for a small sports car (unless reliability was a particular priority). Hence companies like Caterham and Lotus using it.

<snip>
I think a few Japanese manufacturers might disagree...
They might, which is why I said "arguably".

anonymous-user

53 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
An ex of mine owns one of these. Prior to that she had a purple Suzuki X90. Her choice of cars says it all.


DJRC

23,563 posts

235 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
s m said:
kambites said:
I think I'd rather spend a bit more and get a 160 but it's a lovely car nonetheless.

Yes, nice cars - quite safe in a crash too weren't they ( compared to similar cars of the time )?
I'm the living example of that. Head on collision with a fuel tanker. Walked away.
For that reason alone I have always happily defended the TF regardless of their other attractions as daily ragtops . One major drawback though is the worst low speed ride I have ever encountered.

Limpet

6,293 posts

160 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
A colleague had one. Reckoned it was great to drive, and fundamentally reliable, but buld quality was appalling. It leaked, it rattled, bits marked and fell off. At 5 years old and 40k it felt like you could add a 2 in front of both numbers.

But at this money, worth a punt surely.

x19dude

22 posts

136 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
I have to admit - I have had an 2001 MGF non vvc for 2.5 years at this stage - bought it as a cheap summer car with 80k miles on it for very little with the MLS headgasket done, fresh antifreeze and a new radiator. It now has 120k miles on it and is still going strong - It has done a few trackdays as well over the last few years - a bit unpredictable on the limit with the hydragas suspension but all in all a lot of fun for what it is. When it eventually gives up either due to rust or the engine expiring - I will gladly get a TF as a second car.
I think they are great value for money for what they are.

HeMightBeBanned

617 posts

177 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
AW111 said:
kambites said:
At the time, it was arguably the best inline-four engine available for a small sports car (unless reliability was a particular priority). Hence companies like Caterham and Lotus using it.

<snip>
I think a few Japanese manufacturers might disagree...
Which brings us to another of the K-Series virtues: it's bloody light, which is why (for example) Lotus selected it for the Elise in the first place.

Can the same be said for the equivalent Jap twincam lumps, e.g. the one in the MX5?

soad

32,829 posts

175 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
Not bad. There will come a day when there's no cheap ones left - scrapped away etc.

P-Jay

10,551 posts

190 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
Rover gave one of these to us for 6 months when they were new, a 160 version and as much as I've always hated them I really liked driving it - lots of the trim fell off though if I remember correctly - all but the electric window buttons, which were identical to the ones in my MK2 Golf GTi.

Like so many others have said, for that sort of money how can you lose? Even if it completely dies between ebaying the nicer bits and scraping the rest you'll probably break even at worst.

wildcat45

8,056 posts

188 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all

Cracking if flawed little cars. I am in my 4th or 5th.

I've a mate with one and we both agree we love them for many reason but you have to be realistic, they are far from the best cars in the world.

Not much to lose if you pay this sort of shed money for them. Probably worth more as spares so if it all goes wrong you can probably make your money back.

In 2011 I sold mine and bought a new MX-5. Great little car, but I never loved it. I've had 160 TF and MPI Fs but when looking for my latest I decided I preferred the F.and have a lmint condition 2001 MGF MPI.

jayemm89

4,003 posts

129 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
I test drove an F/TF (can't remember which) a few years back for the other half. Nearly rear-ended another car because the brakes on this particular example were utterly dire. Then half a mile in it boiled over. Got back to find the dipstick covered in white crap.

I think that says more about the dealer than the car itself, but suffice it to say I wrote them off after that (the car and dealer)

Blanchie

394 posts

221 months

Friday 28th November 2014
quotequote all
Mobsy said:
I'd read reviews that said that, also that they are cramped for tall drivers. All I can say is that at 6'2" I find neither to be true, maybe the TF is different to the F.
another tall one here that had an F, found it very comphy, various trips round Europe in it and no issues.
Lots of fond memories in my 98 VVC from years ago :-)

I remember looking at the TF and it was VAVE'd to death, better suspension yes, but the rest was cheapened IMO