deliberations deliberations
Discussion
All
I need help, I'm in a quandry, this isn't strictly a lotus post but sort of is.
let me tell you the story, my better half and I have just bought an Elise S1 - generally for her use. It's lovely and we're having great fun but yes I need something practical (ish)
My recent car history is this
MGF -> TVR Chim -> MR2 (mk2)
So I want to stay in the 2 seat cabriolet but still want something more practical than an elise. I thought S2000 as my goal (looking second hand so an older one- around 11k) but then have just seen the rediculously low prices of MGTF's. Was thinking of a 160TF - you can pick them up for circa 7k on a 2003 plate. I'm not a fan of MX5's
questions
a) am I gay for thinking this
b) should I just wait and go for the S2000 sometime next year
c) what are your thoughts - I respect your opinions!
I need help, I'm in a quandry, this isn't strictly a lotus post but sort of is.
let me tell you the story, my better half and I have just bought an Elise S1 - generally for her use. It's lovely and we're having great fun but yes I need something practical (ish)
My recent car history is this
MGF -> TVR Chim -> MR2 (mk2)
So I want to stay in the 2 seat cabriolet but still want something more practical than an elise. I thought S2000 as my goal (looking second hand so an older one- around 11k) but then have just seen the rediculously low prices of MGTF's. Was thinking of a 160TF - you can pick them up for circa 7k on a 2003 plate. I'm not a fan of MX5's
questions
a) am I gay for thinking this
b) should I just wait and go for the S2000 sometime next year
c) what are your thoughts - I respect your opinions!
Seriously though,
the only practical advantage is a few extra litres of boot space in the cars you mention. Big deal. Its not like you can go to B and Q and pick up a shed in an MGF either.
How long have you had the Elise for? Ownership can seem a bit gloomy during the winter months for some, but if you havnt had the car long why not keep it a little longer to see exactly what you can and cant do with it.
I get sacks of shopping in my car and have been away with the girlfriend for 2 weeks with all our luggage packed, its fine for long distance trips and never leaks.
Having said that if its not the car for you then obviously move on but remember why you bought the car in the first place. An S2000 although a reasonable car will be dull in comparrison to the elise.
the only practical advantage is a few extra litres of boot space in the cars you mention. Big deal. Its not like you can go to B and Q and pick up a shed in an MGF either.
How long have you had the Elise for? Ownership can seem a bit gloomy during the winter months for some, but if you havnt had the car long why not keep it a little longer to see exactly what you can and cant do with it.
I get sacks of shopping in my car and have been away with the girlfriend for 2 weeks with all our luggage packed, its fine for long distance trips and never leaks.
Having said that if its not the car for you then obviously move on but remember why you bought the car in the first place. An S2000 although a reasonable car will be dull in comparrison to the elise.
) Max power at 8500 Sorry guys, yes the S2k or whatever is in addition to the S1 - not getting rid of that before I've had at least another summer it's too much fun!
The extra bootspace is basically a plus as the other half teaches drama and now and then has a few bags of props - not alot but more than can fit in the Elise (+ she's fed up of trying to climb in and out of the Elise!)
I think I'm sort of looking for an all rounder but want the drop top, have no kids so don't need more than 2 seats and to be honest not a fan of the big cabrio's - just too old man for me (or in case of the Beamer ones - this area has too many young lad wannabe's in them)
I loved a brand new S2k but I keep thinking cost vs car and you've gotta admit the 2nd hand prices on the TF's are very low.
>> Edited by dinger1 on Tuesday 29th November 21:13
The extra bootspace is basically a plus as the other half teaches drama and now and then has a few bags of props - not alot but more than can fit in the Elise (+ she's fed up of trying to climb in and out of the Elise!)
I think I'm sort of looking for an all rounder but want the drop top, have no kids so don't need more than 2 seats and to be honest not a fan of the big cabrio's - just too old man for me (or in case of the Beamer ones - this area has too many young lad wannabe's in them)
I loved a brand new S2k but I keep thinking cost vs car and you've gotta admit the 2nd hand prices on the TF's are very low.
>> Edited by dinger1 on Tuesday 29th November 21:13
Yet again we disagree. They're cheap to buy, reliable, IMvHO look reasonable, have bags of kit, loads of room etc.
But it ain't no Elise/S2k etc.
Frankly I'd go for a nice hothatch mate which you can chuck about and have fun in, but still be able to drop the rear seats when you need to lug crap about.
Cooper S Works all the way.
But it ain't no Elise/S2k etc.
Frankly I'd go for a nice hothatch mate which you can chuck about and have fun in, but still be able to drop the rear seats when you need to lug crap about.
Cooper S Works all the way.
C70 - not really my cup of tea, I'm looking at a 2 seat (never have to give granny a lift home/friends to airport/be designated driver etc) so think I'm either on :
MGTF160
MX5
MR2 (doesn't help with the boot space)
Z3 (nope, brother in law has a Z4 so I can't open myself up to abuse from him and can't afford an "M" version)
S2k
I suppose I could always get another S1 Elise lol.
MGTF160
MX5
MR2 (doesn't help with the boot space)
Z3 (nope, brother in law has a Z4 so I can't open myself up to abuse from him and can't afford an "M" version)
S2k
I suppose I could always get another S1 Elise lol.
My review of the MGTF160: The car was a 53 reg, and I drove it in April of this year. In summary, I prefer the MR2!
***********************************************************************
In 2001(?), MG transformed their 'F' into the 'TF'. This coincided with the relaunching of MG as a brand with cars such as the ZT and ZR, and a re-branded 'X Power' engine line up. With the roadster game having moved on with driver focused cars such as the MR2 and S2000, MG decided to try and shift associations with the MX5 (and even the 206CC) towards associations with cars such as the MR2 and S2000.
Along with many other changes to the outgoing MGF, MG focused the styling, and ditched the ageing Hydragas suspension in favour of a more conventional spring and damper arrangement, attached to a trailing arm layout. In truth there was nothing that much wrong with Hydragas (it remains a pretty good idea), but the whole theme of the car was updated and focused into a new product - the TF.
The car that I drove was the range topping '160' model (not to be confused with the Trophy 160, a last swansong of the outgoing MGF with over-stiff suspension), originally retailing at a whopping £19,995, though now available second hand from £11,000 upwards. The car that I drove was a late 2003 model with 4,400 miles on the clock, advertised for £11,495 at a main dealer.
Initial thoughts when getting behind the wheel are that you sit way too high, with a strange off centre steering wheel resting on your lap (that was on its highest setting..) and your forehead level with the top of the windscreen. Not a good start, but the cabin feels well screwed together compared with the car's price rivals (MX5 and MR2), and the seats are comfortable and supportive. There is no clutch foot rest, which admitedly you do quickly get used to living without, and the pedals are well spaced for heel and toe (though not as good as a 3 series for example). The gearchange is a little too stiff, but very positive.
Pulling away the car feels easy to drive, with well assisted steering making manouvering a doddle. The clutch has good feel, though the throttle on my car had a little hesitancy to initially pick up, though I'm sure that you would quickly get used to this.
First off, the engine. This a slightly tweaked version of the VVC that was previously fitted to the MG range, this time producing 160bhp. Sadly, it is quite a characterless engine, the sound being a slow whoosing noise regardless of revs, and the torque curve flat and uninteresting. The engine shifts the 1111kg car satisfactorily - it feels a little more urgent than the MR2, and obviously a lot quicker than the glacial MX5. Quoted 0-60 is 6.9secs and this seems achievable given the car's high grip mid-engined layout.
Across smooth roads (in our case, the Basingstoke ring road), the car rode well with perhaps a slght amount more body roll than expected. The firmness/comfort ratio was about right. Quick cornering was greeted with more understeer than initially expected, almost as if the front end contained more mass than you would expect. More steering and a lift balanced the car, though this is a chassis that feels most composed when pushing at 7/10ths, rather than 9/10ths. The engine is also maybe mounted a touch too high, giving more momentum to any tendancy to roll than the MR2 or Elise.
Onto bumpy B roads and the car copes well, riding very comfortably. However, the TF never seems to 'key in' to the tarmac in the same was as an MR2 or Elise - remaining quite floaty, which defies its relatively low mass (1111kg). Certainly the nicely firm low speed ride doesn't transpire fully into stiff and composed high speed ride and handling. Balance at speed on bumpy roads is good, though again that understeer is still present, thus requiring some forced neutralisation on turn in, though subtle at the sort of 7/10ths pace that any sane adult would drive at.
Overall impressions of the car were good; the MG TF certainly does nothing wrong, other than its less than ideal driving position, though it lacks in two other key areas. The first failing is a lack of character (not helped by the souless VVC engine), and the second shortfall being that 'extra something' that makes cars like the MR2 and MX5 really stand out. Naturally, the MR2 doesn't have a boot, and the MX5 is too slow; leaving the MG TF in a strong position in this sector. Certainly, if you are sufficiently shaped to get comfortable behind the wheel the TF would be a natural choice. Sadly though, the TF, MX5 and MR2 all have their own shortfallings, making an awkward choice for a £20k roadster buyer.
***********************************************************************
***********************************************************************
In 2001(?), MG transformed their 'F' into the 'TF'. This coincided with the relaunching of MG as a brand with cars such as the ZT and ZR, and a re-branded 'X Power' engine line up. With the roadster game having moved on with driver focused cars such as the MR2 and S2000, MG decided to try and shift associations with the MX5 (and even the 206CC) towards associations with cars such as the MR2 and S2000.
Along with many other changes to the outgoing MGF, MG focused the styling, and ditched the ageing Hydragas suspension in favour of a more conventional spring and damper arrangement, attached to a trailing arm layout. In truth there was nothing that much wrong with Hydragas (it remains a pretty good idea), but the whole theme of the car was updated and focused into a new product - the TF.
The car that I drove was the range topping '160' model (not to be confused with the Trophy 160, a last swansong of the outgoing MGF with over-stiff suspension), originally retailing at a whopping £19,995, though now available second hand from £11,000 upwards. The car that I drove was a late 2003 model with 4,400 miles on the clock, advertised for £11,495 at a main dealer.
Initial thoughts when getting behind the wheel are that you sit way too high, with a strange off centre steering wheel resting on your lap (that was on its highest setting..) and your forehead level with the top of the windscreen. Not a good start, but the cabin feels well screwed together compared with the car's price rivals (MX5 and MR2), and the seats are comfortable and supportive. There is no clutch foot rest, which admitedly you do quickly get used to living without, and the pedals are well spaced for heel and toe (though not as good as a 3 series for example). The gearchange is a little too stiff, but very positive.
Pulling away the car feels easy to drive, with well assisted steering making manouvering a doddle. The clutch has good feel, though the throttle on my car had a little hesitancy to initially pick up, though I'm sure that you would quickly get used to this.
First off, the engine. This a slightly tweaked version of the VVC that was previously fitted to the MG range, this time producing 160bhp. Sadly, it is quite a characterless engine, the sound being a slow whoosing noise regardless of revs, and the torque curve flat and uninteresting. The engine shifts the 1111kg car satisfactorily - it feels a little more urgent than the MR2, and obviously a lot quicker than the glacial MX5. Quoted 0-60 is 6.9secs and this seems achievable given the car's high grip mid-engined layout.
Across smooth roads (in our case, the Basingstoke ring road), the car rode well with perhaps a slght amount more body roll than expected. The firmness/comfort ratio was about right. Quick cornering was greeted with more understeer than initially expected, almost as if the front end contained more mass than you would expect. More steering and a lift balanced the car, though this is a chassis that feels most composed when pushing at 7/10ths, rather than 9/10ths. The engine is also maybe mounted a touch too high, giving more momentum to any tendancy to roll than the MR2 or Elise.
Onto bumpy B roads and the car copes well, riding very comfortably. However, the TF never seems to 'key in' to the tarmac in the same was as an MR2 or Elise - remaining quite floaty, which defies its relatively low mass (1111kg). Certainly the nicely firm low speed ride doesn't transpire fully into stiff and composed high speed ride and handling. Balance at speed on bumpy roads is good, though again that understeer is still present, thus requiring some forced neutralisation on turn in, though subtle at the sort of 7/10ths pace that any sane adult would drive at.
Overall impressions of the car were good; the MG TF certainly does nothing wrong, other than its less than ideal driving position, though it lacks in two other key areas. The first failing is a lack of character (not helped by the souless VVC engine), and the second shortfall being that 'extra something' that makes cars like the MR2 and MX5 really stand out. Naturally, the MR2 doesn't have a boot, and the MX5 is too slow; leaving the MG TF in a strong position in this sector. Certainly, if you are sufficiently shaped to get comfortable behind the wheel the TF would be a natural choice. Sadly though, the TF, MX5 and MR2 all have their own shortfallings, making an awkward choice for a £20k roadster buyer.
***********************************************************************
:
Reviewing cars is a bit of a hobby of mine. I have a large shared drive at work full of them! Gassing Station | Elise/Exige/Europa/340R | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff