RE: <b>SCOOP!</b> MG SV in the Flesh

RE: <b>SCOOP!</b> MG SV in the Flesh

Author
Discussion

danmangt40

296 posts

286 months

Wednesday 4th June 2003
quotequote all
I think it actually looks much less OTT in this color than the gray. Being able to see the details shows the arches to be much more progressive and the lower bodywork to be better integrated than the tacked-on look the gray car had. And I doubt that stability is going to be an issue in that beast. The mustang should look like this. hmmm
65k pounds *1.7 dollars/pound (may be out of date)= 110.50k?!!! holy crap you all get ripped off over there. that kind of money buys a 911 turbo here. or TWO corvette z06s with 405hp apiece, each of which would show taillights to this monster.
My thoughts to MG:
Drop the price to adjust for higher US demand, use the detomaso/qvale mangusta's US registration, and c'mon over! the car is great otherwise. very butch, and we need more sports cars that are uniquely manly. I've seen too many trophy wives driving 'vettes and 'boxsters. Intionally brute to nearly ugly is the way to go. Viper and Mroadster almost entirely driven by men over here.

Buffalo

5,435 posts

256 months

Wednesday 4th June 2003
quotequote all
Nice Motor!

Friend of mine was treated to a rare treat the other day - the MG ZT260 happened to be on the M6 when he joined in is own ZT160. He put his toe down and chased forthwith, managed just about to keep up.

Aparently the driver of the 260 played with him a bit, giving it squirts of power here and there, it certainly left the ZT160 for standing when the driver left him...!

He wrote a piece about it and emailed me, i'll see if i still have it and post it up - at least MG are actually out there and using these cars, istead of just talking about them.

Isn't this car supposed to be in a similar market to the noble et al? I didn't even think there had been a review of this thing driving yet, so how can anyone say they would buy a noble over one? Unless you are going on looks alone, and quite rightly if that was solely your case your opinion sucks They are both low volume cars, ok the noble is rated at the moment, but the MG might be twice as good on the track and on the road... The new 5 series Beemer is pig ugly but every one will buy one because they *think* its going to drive well - i reserve my judgement on this car until i have read the driving reviews, but IMO i think it looks ok....

Just don't choose "burger cheese yellow" as a colour!

>> Edited by Buffalo on Wednesday 4th June 18:30

dandarez

13,317 posts

285 months

Wednesday 4th June 2003
quotequote all
Wot, no reversing lights (surely they are not part of -below?- indicators!
Rear light layout is haphazard, just like they've been thrown on, after being bought at an autojumble - yuk!!

LathamJohnP

4,414 posts

286 months

Thursday 5th June 2003
quotequote all
buffalo,

No-one spends 65k on something they think looks crap, so yes, looks are important, although beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

John

andymadmak

14,665 posts

272 months

Thursday 5th June 2003
quotequote all
I thought the basic SV (as pictured) was a bit cheaper than this. The 65k relates to the race fettled one doesn't it? or am I talking bollards again?
Always remember that they plan to offer a 1000bhp version complete with nitrous
Now, if they did that for .....say...... 66k, then I might just be tempted to get my cheque book out!

Andy 400se

larobinson

22 posts

270 months

Friday 6th June 2003
quotequote all
i wouldnt mind one but with the optional noz kit to take it up too around 900bhp nice! it would pee on most other dull machines!