Classic rear-drive British sports car for sale
We're through the looking glass, people. Forget what you think you know about the MG F
All these years on, we’re past the point of being mean about MG Fs - aren’t we? Back when everything was cheap (it’s almost 12 years to the day since the E34 M5 Shed of the Week) it probably was a good giggle to point at neglected MGs with expired head gaskets and wonky Hydragas suspension - then buy something else fun, also for a pittance. But we now live in the world of the £600k Sierra Cossie and £15k apparently being the entry point for ‘affordable’ modern classic motoring. The landscape has changed almost beyond recognition in a very short period. Yet a low mileage, very smart MG F - a pretty, two-seat, mid-engined, rear-drive sports car - is still available for £5k. Ignore the prejudice; this might be the F’s time to shine.
Let’s not forget, either, that the MG was highly rated as a new car. Autocar described it as an ‘MG to make you proud’ at the end of the 20th century, calling the F ‘pretty and able’. When it road tested a VVC, the 1,121kg roadster sprinted to 60mph in just 7.5 seconds, and could reach almost 130. Car magazine praised the F for its ‘excellent performance’, ‘safe, grippy’ handling and ‘saloon-like’ ride. It was a solid four-star sports car. It was only those maladies that came later that would tarnish the MG’s reputation.
But come on, there aren’t many cars out there that haven’t developed issues in the decades following their launch. And plenty that have seen values rise. It’s hardly like the MG F is a Noble M10 or Caterham 21, either; they were popular back in the day and sold well, with a comprehensive support network around them. Almost 30 years on from launch, the MG F is well known; if something goes wrong, you won’t be the first. It can be fixed.
In addition, because so many of the poor examples did fall by the wayside, it feels like a lot of the Fs now remaining are the real good’uns. Here’s your evidence. A 1998 VVC in Nightfire Red, it’s covered a mere 43,000 miles in 25 years and looks to be in great condition. There’s rust in the MOT history (there’s yeast in bread and fish in the sea, too), but that’s been tended to a few years back and the recent tests have had much less to report. A period off the road between 2011 and 2018 might help explain the low mileage.
The F also benefits from an ‘Engine Temperature/Coolant Control Indication System’, a little dash display which should help warn against any looming K Series problems. And most of that engine’s reputation came from it having to lug around heavy SUVs and saloons rather than sports cars, anyway. But probably a useful thing to have. Elsewhere there’s a lot to be encouraged by: no unsightly tears, scratches or scrapes, a hardtop that fits perfectly and four very presentable alloys.
The selling dealer says they specialise in sourcing and selling the very best modern classic Rovers and MGs, so you have to assume they pass on a lot of stuff. At the end of the day, this is still a 25-year-old British sports car, and just those words alone will be enough to put off some. But then a 25-year-old anything isn’t likely to be free of problems. And be more expensive: if you want to buy an original MX-5 for less than £5k now, it’ll have a mileage well into six figures. Perhaps the biggest obstacle to MG F ownership remains as it was a quarter of a century ago: the second MX-5. There are NBs with comparable mileage to the F at similar money. And you don’t need us to remind you of that appeal. But doing things just a bit differently never looked so appealing.
SPECIFICATION | MG F
Engine: 1,796cc, four-cyl
Transmission: 5-speed manual, rear-wheel drive
Power (hp): 145@7,000rpm
Torque (lb ft): 128@4,500rpm
MPG: 36.2
CO2: 189g/km
Recorded mileage: 43,000
Year registered: 1998
Price new: £20,670
Yours for: £5,495
Unfortunately, at the first service I came to realise that subframes, suspension all pipework underneath including exhaust were all crusty rusty. Seriously disappointed as all the painted panels were nearly immaculate. It was low so couldn't exam the car when I went to see and pick up. Also there was no mention of rust at the mot history (wonder how the do mot up north).
Otherwise a very nice car. Subsequently got an elise S1 which i rate as the definitive british roadster of the past 40 yrs and I thought that the MGF is a bit more practical version of that.
But my primary issue is the way these and the TF drive. They are heavily compromised as transport, but they never seemed as fun as they should be comparable to the compromises being asked. I found many hot hatch to be just as interesting to drive so it was really the opening roof that seemed to be the big feature. A car in which you were told it was sporty so get with the programme rather than in my opinion being particularly sporty. They could be noisy and rough - but is that sporty? I do admit though that I generally prefer a front engined car, so it could very well be my failure.
But my primary issue is the way these and the TF drive. They are heavily compromised as transport, but they never seemed as fun as they should be comparable to the compromises being asked. I found many hot hatch to be just as interesting to drive so it was really the opening roof that seemed to be the big feature. A car in which you were told it was sporty so get with the programme rather than in my opinion being particularly sporty. They could be noisy and rough - but is that sporty? I do admit though that I generally prefer a front engined car, so it could very well be my failure.
Currently I have an na eunos, sorn'd while I amass the funds necessary to sort out the continuous corrosion chase, I never found it better to drive than an F, but am a sucker for pop ups.
IMO the big problems with the F are the build quality (which can largely be rectified with enough TLC); the tendency for the roof to leak (which I think can also be fixed); and the weirdly high driving position. Well and rust, but it's no worse than the MX5 there!
We dragged it out of a garage he rents locally, it wouldnt fire, tried another time and it started, got it back to my place and it was failing to start again, checked the starter motor connections and the one between the starter and the solenoid disintegrated to dust so not sure if that is the problem, it cant be helping. Its an utter pig to get to, and now it needs a new starter as I dont think that wire is replaceable as it dissapears into the starter motor body.
So, I have entered as the late, great Douglas Adams put it A "somebody elses problem field", I need to source and change, or get changed a starter on a largely worthless 20 year old MGF. or it is until it has an MOT.
Car is quite nice, nice dark metallic green, immaculate silver wheels, very original with 54k, its had a clutch and a new hood, all the tyres are fine, interior perfect. Gave it a wash and a quick polish and its come up really well.
Had a quick drive but not enough to give any insights, but I do think they are a little maligned, an MX5 is better but you will be chasing rust on examples that are in the realm of a very tidy MGF price wise, anything 2/3 grand ish which is the bar for a serviceable MGF will be a nightmare in a lot of cases with an MX5, but then the MGF also has plenty of nightmares of its own.
Forums | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff