Who buys modern day MGs?
Discussion
Ignoring the current round of "Roewe" eseque cars from MG.
This was originally interesting but the final delivery looks nothing like the original concept to me??
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/mg-e-m...
This was originally interesting but the final delivery looks nothing like the original concept to me??
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/mg-e-m...
Can't stand the sight of modern day MGs, really have no idea how they can use the name on something so far removed from what Morris Garages cars were. Have no idea who on Earth buys them. 
At least the '80s Metros and Maestros had a degree of 'sportiness'.
This was exactly what my last MG looked like:
Twenty-eight years ago. Loved it!
At least the '80s Metros and Maestros had a degree of 'sportiness'.
This was exactly what my last MG looked like:
Twenty-eight years ago. Loved it!
vixen1700 said:
kambites said:
If you bother to read this thread you'll find out.
I did and now I know you're looking at one for your mum. 
Mr lestat said:
An ideal cheap car for anyone’s Mum. They aren’t too bothered about most things generally. My mum on having a new Peugeot 106 the only thing she could say was that the indicator tick was louder than in her last car. ??
I wish. We're trying to explain to my mum why she can't have a DBS for her 70th birthday.InitialDave said:
Mr lestat said:
An ideal cheap car for anyone’s Mum. They aren’t too bothered about most things generally. My mum on having a new Peugeot 106 the only thing she could say was that the indicator tick was louder than in her last car. ??
I wish. We're trying to explain to my mum why she can't have a DBS for her 70th birthday.Joey Deacon said:
Are modern MGs that cheap in reality compared to a Kia or Hyundai?
Have you seen the price of the Korean brands recently?A Picanto starts at 9.5k for a 1.0, about the save as an MG3 and more than a Citigo. A Dacia Logan is a grand cheaper!
Edited by FA57REN on Sunday 12th July 15:22
stickleback123 said:
Anyone who gives it the "Mercedes/BMW are white goods too and no different to Ford/Peugeot/Whatever" have no idea what they are talking about.
There's always one person who starts a strawman argument in these threads.....stickleback123 said:
Get underneath and have a good look at the chassis engineering; one set of cars will have lots of really nice aluminium parts, double wishbones at the front for many (fancy dual pivot double wishbones on some), multilink at the rear again with lots of expensive high quality aluminium parts. Another set will be a load of stamped steel, 100% McPherson struts at the front, very possibly a torsion beam at the rear, everything made as cheaply as possible. Check out the bushes, notice that one set of cars have all sorts of interesting different designs and some may be fluid filled for extra NVH isolation...
While we're here have a look at the exhaust mounts; one set have rubber donuts indistinguishable from the ones used in the 70s and another will have complex parts to better isolate the car from exhaust noise and vibration.
Look at how much of the underside is clad, at the pieces to direct air. Or don't if it's an actual white goods car.....
...and so he drones on. While we're here have a look at the exhaust mounts; one set have rubber donuts indistinguishable from the ones used in the 70s and another will have complex parts to better isolate the car from exhaust noise and vibration.
Look at how much of the underside is clad, at the pieces to direct air. Or don't if it's an actual white goods car.....
The definition of a white goods car is one bought by people who do not know or care about any of the above. You are actually kind of proving the point. Ask yourself the percentage of Mercedes/BMW owners who are aware of what you have said there. I'd bet my pension the percentage is in single figures.
Plus, stop comparing MGs with anything that costs between 4 and 30 times their price. Senseless, and anyone who is in the know knows that the 'premium' brands cheap out on the engineering in their lower, lesser models, supplying bog-standard parts and stamped steel wishbones but the same badge to an unsuspecting purchaser buying into an image. How crestfallen would an otherwise ignorant A-Class Merc owner be if you told them it was a Renault engine under their bonnet, or the MINI owner blissfully unaware that their car shares an engine with a Peugeot?
What difference does it make really though, because a costly car can still be 'white goods'. Likewise an inexpensive car can still be a reasoned choice.
A 'white goods' car is not defined by the car itself but by the attitude of the person buying it.
Edited by Evercross on Sunday 12th July 18:54
vixen1700 said:
kambites said:
If you bother to read this thread you'll find out.
I did and now I know you're looking at one for your mum. I'm looking to buy one for me or at least to serve as our family car, which in practice means more for my wife because I mostly drive the Lotus. We're interested in it not because it's the best car on the market, it's clearly far from it, but because it may well be the best value.
I loved my MGB, it's probably the car I got most emotionally attached to of all of those I've owned and I think it's a shame that the MG of old no longer exists... but that doesn't make the new MGs any less valid cars for people who want what they offer.
Edited by kambites on Sunday 12th July 19:03
kambites said:
Not sure where you got that idea from! I said she's the sort of person who would buy one if she was after a car. She in fact has a Kia she's quite happy with.
I'm looking to buy one for me or at least to serve as our family car, which in practice means more for my wife because I mostly drive the Lotus. We're interested in it not because it's the best car on the market, it's clearly far from it, but because it may well be the best value.
I loved my MGB, it's probably the car I got most emotionally attached to of all of those I've owned and I think it's a shame that the MG of old no longer exists... but that doesn't make the new MGs any less valid cars for people who want what they offer.
Ha, well that explains why you're are so defensive of them then. How does the value work when you factor in depreciation?I'm looking to buy one for me or at least to serve as our family car, which in practice means more for my wife because I mostly drive the Lotus. We're interested in it not because it's the best car on the market, it's clearly far from it, but because it may well be the best value.
I loved my MGB, it's probably the car I got most emotionally attached to of all of those I've owned and I think it's a shame that the MG of old no longer exists... but that doesn't make the new MGs any less valid cars for people who want what they offer.
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 12th July 19:03
Argleton said:
Ha, well that explains why you're are so defensive of them then. How does the value work when you factor in depreciation?
Not sure why you think it's explain anything of the sort? It's not in any way shape or form the same company anymore, I don't see the relevance of it happening to carry the same badge. Badge has never really meant much to me anyway. Depreciation on EVs is pretty minimal. If it wasn't, we wouldn't be considering an MG, we'd get something better second-hand.
daytonavrs said:
Ignoring the current round of "Roewe" eseque cars from MG.
This was originally interesting but the final delivery looks nothing like the original concept to me??
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/mg-e-m...
Started out being an Aston Martin Vanquish wannabee, but the red later version seems to have gone a bit Tesla ( not an improvement either)...This was originally interesting but the final delivery looks nothing like the original concept to me??
https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/mg-e-m...
Having just read this thread, the one thing that strikes me is a lot of poor reviews about the quality/feel of the engine.
So it's 1.5 NA with over 100bhp, over 40 mpg but lethargic.
These statistics match my Suzuki Ignis which is an exciting fizzy revvy engine.
Can it really be that bad or are people comparing it to a Clio 182 or EP3 Type-R
So it's 1.5 NA with over 100bhp, over 40 mpg but lethargic.
These statistics match my Suzuki Ignis which is an exciting fizzy revvy engine.
Can it really be that bad or are people comparing it to a Clio 182 or EP3 Type-R
Has anyone noticed that the glass on these isn't even UV tinted (like 90% of vehicles on the road are).
They are VERY popular with the motability scheme, I see them day in day out in the healthcare sector as they offer lots of space (particularly for wheelchairs) and are cheap motoring.
They are VERY popular with the motability scheme, I see them day in day out in the healthcare sector as they offer lots of space (particularly for wheelchairs) and are cheap motoring.
leef44 said:
Having just read this thread, the one thing that strikes me is a lot of poor reviews about the quality/feel of the engine.
So it's 1.5 NA with over 100bhp, over 40 mpg but lethargic.
It really is that bad. It's not a patch on a 1.4 K Series. Easily the worst thing about the MG3 I had.So it's 1.5 NA with over 100bhp, over 40 mpg but lethargic.
BenRichards89 said:
leef44 said:
Having just read this thread, the one thing that strikes me is a lot of poor reviews about the quality/feel of the engine.
So it's 1.5 NA with over 100bhp, over 40 mpg but lethargic.
It really is that bad. It's not a patch on a 1.4 K Series. Easily the worst thing about the MG3 I had.So it's 1.5 NA with over 100bhp, over 40 mpg but lethargic.
Gassing Station | MG | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff