RE: MG F Trophy: Spotted
Sunday 17th March 2019
MG F Trophy: Spotted
Hang on a minute - has the MG F become a classic car?
While it may be easy to deride out of hand (or habit), it should not be forgotten just what a milestone the MG F's introduction really was. Because, in 1995, there wasn't much notable about MG; the Maestro and Montego were very much in recent memory, and don't forget the B had been shamelessly resurrected to create the RV8. By the time of the its introduction in 1992, the B had been out of production for more than a decade. Imagine that happening today - if, say, Honda brought back the S2000. But it had leaf springs. And rear drums.
So you can see what a breath of fresh air the MG F must have been, with a new engine, look and platform. Furthermore, while the F had its well documented problems, there can be no denying the plaudits it received on launch. It rode and handled pretty nicely, wasn't too expensive and it arrived at a time when there was still some considerable affection for the MG brand in the UK.
For a while it was the best selling drop-top sports car over here; then, when BMW abandoned ship, MG really cut loose (fear of cannibalising Z3 is said to have prevented it beforehand) and created a faster F.
The resulting Trophy followed the recipe that has always proved so popular for sporting flagships: latch it on to a race car programme (in this case the MG F Cup), give it more power, firmer suspension and a bold new look. With 160hp and a 0-60mph time of less than seven seconds, the Trophy gave the F the shot in the arm it really needed after half a dozen years on sale.
Given it arrived not long before the F was replaced by the TF, there have never been many Trophys in the UK - HowManyLeft has a peak of 714 in 2003, down to 294 last year. Bear in mind there are still 5,000 regular MG Fs registered in the UK and you begin to appreciate just how rare it is.
This one looks a gem, with only two owners from new, 45,000 miles and lots of money spent recently (including on a head gasket and cambelt renewal). And although time may not have been that kind to the F's styling, something this light, revvy and focused in period must feel incredible nearly 20 years later. Back in 2001 the Trophy was criticised for its firm ride; given how cars have changed in the meantime, it would be remarkable if modern tolerances found it too awful. Which means you'd be left with a fast, rare, mid-engined, rear-drive sports car for £5k, and who wouldn't fancy one of those?
Now, of course, an MX-5 of the same era with similar miles can be had for less money, and the Mk3 MR2 should also be considered as a mid-engined alternative, but those cars will be slower and considerably more common. The F is never going to appeal to everyone, sure, but its combination of talents looks more appealing as time passes and its 25th anniversary approaches. Or perhaps we've all just gone around the bend in a fit of nostalgia. Still, nothing like a good debate on the virtues of an old British sports car...
SPECIFICATION - MG F TROPHY
Engine: 1,796cc, four-cyl
Transmission: 5-speed manual, rear-wheel drive
Power (hp): 160@6,900rpm
Torque (lb ft): 125@4,500rpm
MPG: 36.3 (standard VVC)
CO2: N/A
First registered: 2001
Recorded mileage: 45,000
Price new: £20,995
Yours for: £4,995
Discussion
I bought an MGTF recently for 500 quid. Mine's the 135 non-VVC version. It's a great little thing. I was looking at these and MX5s but in my price range locally (up to £1500) most of the Mazda's were rusting away at the front chassis rails.
It's not faultless (£500, 106,000 miles to be fair), it's a bit tired cosmetically and I replaced the throttle cable as it was sticky which took an hour and cost £60.
It was bought as a temporary shed while the wife's car is getting resprayed. I'm now torn between do I keep it, or flog it, but I think the only thing I'd replace it with this be a 160 vvc. Or an XK8, but I don't have the pennies!
It's not faultless (£500, 106,000 miles to be fair), it's a bit tired cosmetically and I replaced the throttle cable as it was sticky which took an hour and cost £60.
It was bought as a temporary shed while the wife's car is getting resprayed. I'm now torn between do I keep it, or flog it, but I think the only thing I'd replace it with this be a 160 vvc. Or an XK8, but I don't have the pennies!
We had an MGTF which was fantastic, but let down by the head gasket failure, twice under warranty, which made my wife hate it so we sold.
It drove better than the MR2 that followed, which never had a single fault in almost 100k miles. except in the engine it was alround better than the MR2
It drove better than the MR2 that followed, which never had a single fault in almost 100k miles. except in the engine it was alround better than the MR2
spaximus said:
We had an MGTF which was fantastic, but let down by the head gasket failure, twice under warranty, which made my wife hate it so we sold.
Design a car that looks spot-on with a sporty engine let down by dodgy head gaskets which I'm led to believe was soon sorted by an after-market company ala Triumph Stag. It's so ludicrous to be let down like this it makes you wonder if a certain element wanted it to fail.Raygun said:
Design a car that looks spot-on with a sporty engine let down by dodgy head gaskets which I'm led to believe was soon sorted by an after-market company ala Triumph Stag. It's so ludicrous to be let down like this it makes you wonder if a certain element wanted it to fail.
Not really true. The K engine was, and still is, a fantastic engine. The problem was how it was put together. Then, how it was ‘repaired’. If the liner heights were out, which they were in a lot of cases a head gasket just masked the issue. My own little K series adventure resulted in 240HP from the 1800, and a very sweet thing indeed. They are compact and you can lift them almost on your own. A brilliant design let down by bean counters and slack QC.yonex said:
Raygun said:
Design a car that looks spot-on with a sporty engine let down by dodgy head gaskets which I'm led to believe was soon sorted by an after-market company ala Triumph Stag. It's so ludicrous to be let down like this it makes you wonder if a certain element wanted it to fail.
Not really true. The K engine was, and still is, a fantastic engine. The problem was how it was put together. Then, how it was ‘repaired’. If the liner heights were out, which they were in a lot of cases a head gasket just masked the issue. My own little K series adventure resulted in 240HP from the 1800, and a very sweet thing indeed. They are compact and you can lift them almost on your own. A brilliant design let down by bean counters and slack QC.Just can't believe how they had a winner but let themselves down especially after the same thing many years previous.
Once again the old cliche is wheeled out ' Snatched from the joys of victory'
Raygun said:
yonex said:
Raygun said:
Design a car that looks spot-on with a sporty engine let down by dodgy head gaskets which I'm led to believe was soon sorted by an after-market company ala Triumph Stag. It's so ludicrous to be let down like this it makes you wonder if a certain element wanted it to fail.
Not really true. The K engine was, and still is, a fantastic engine. The problem was how it was put together. Then, how it was ‘repaired’. If the liner heights were out, which they were in a lot of cases a head gasket just masked the issue. My own little K series adventure resulted in 240HP from the 1800, and a very sweet thing indeed. They are compact and you can lift them almost on your own. A brilliant design let down by bean counters and slack QC.Just can't believe how they had a winner but let themselves down especially after the same thing many years previous.
Once again the old cliche is wheeled out ' Snatched from the joys of victory'
Raygun said:
Thanks for putting me right, remember a chap in a Lotus with the K-series and I think that was no probs.
Just can't believe how they had a winner but let themselves down especially after the same thing many years previous.
Once again the old cliche is wheeled out ' Snatched from the joys of victory'
Just a short list, can’t recall the lot;Just can't believe how they had a winner but let themselves down especially after the same thing many years previous.
Once again the old cliche is wheeled out ' Snatched from the joys of victory'
- Crap in the smelting process, lead to voids in the heads
- changed from steel to plastic dowels which allowed flex. IIRC this change was due to assembly damaging heads when they assembled. Instead of a jig, change to plastic!
- liner heights not controlled. Without 006’ on each the gasket doesn’t seal. When repaired they just used a thicker gasket. The real fix is machining the block.
- terrible balancing. They never balanced the engine properly, clutch or pulley.
- aftermarket tuners, they screwed everything up using much stronger engine bolts
Apart from that, things went very well
yonex said:
Not really true. The K engine was, and still is, a fantastic engine. The problem was how it was put together. Then, how it was ‘repaired’. If the liner heights were out, which they were in a lot of cases a head gasket just masked the issue. My own little K series adventure resulted in 240HP from the 1800, and a very sweet thing indeed. They are compact and you can lift them almost on your own. A brilliant design let down by bean counters and slack QC.
I think it's a bit more complex than that. There certainly were assembly and cost-cutting issues (especially in late BMW era) , but there were design problems too - the oil ladder was never really rigid enough for the job it did and the cooling channels within the engine were never the best of designs meaning that the engine tends to suffer from significant temperature gradients, especially when pushed hard from cold. A well assembled K-series can be relaible if treated well, mine was faultless for more than ten years until the point where the thermostat failed last week (and what a pig of a job that looks to replace), but even the best K-series (with the possible exception of the recentish N-series upgrades) will never put up with the abuse that something like a K20 can cope with. I think that's the primary reason that things like Elises and Caterhams fare so much better than the MGR products in terms of reliability - they simply get looked after better.
I like the F more than the MX5 in many respects but it was always severely let down by its driving position, IMO.
Edited by kambites on Sunday 17th March 11:02
kambites said:
I think it's a bit more complex than that. There certainly were assembly and cost-cutting issues (especially in late BMW era) , but there were design problems too - the oil ladder was never really rigid enough for the job it did and the cooling channels within the engine were never the best of designs meaning that the engine tends to suffer from significant temperature gradients, especially when pushed hard from cold.
A well assembled K-series can be relaible if treated well, but even the best K-series (with the possible exception of the recentish N-series upgrades) will never put up with the abuse that something like a K20 can cope with. I think that's the primary reason that things like Elises and Caterhams fare so much better than the MGR products in terms of reliability - they simply get looked after better.
Agreed, but you can’t compare the K20 as it has enormously different valve overlap with VTEC. To achieve 240, the 1800 had a lumpy cam which needed some clearance grinding in the casing. It never revved as freely as the B18C, which I actually prefer to the K20 by a margin, but it was a lot more linear. It was also lighter and more compact. The recent Caterhams with the Duratecs don’t do it for me, soulless things imo. The 420 just felt flat to me in stock trim. Considering the design brief, a 1400 60HP, orvwharever it was output, the fact it took a 2 Litre bore and 4.5 times the power is remarkable. Temperatures in K’s was another stupid move. Relocating the thermocouple and using an aftermarket system helps a lot. A well assembled K-series can be relaible if treated well, but even the best K-series (with the possible exception of the recentish N-series upgrades) will never put up with the abuse that something like a K20 can cope with. I think that's the primary reason that things like Elises and Caterhams fare so much better than the MGR products in terms of reliability - they simply get looked after better.
I used to be one of the herd that dissed MGFs, and trot out the usual mantra of hgf, hairdressers bolides etc.
Then a friend and I bought 3 on the trot, a couple of 135’s and a Trophy.
The scales fell from my eyes, and I realised what a bargain they were, £ for £ (or Ib)
The last one we bought cost us £475 and came from a lovely middle class lady owner who had spent £8k in servicing, maintenance etc etc over her ownership.
The gout who bought it from us for £795 got a bargain and was over the moon with it, as he bought it for his son who was in the Army in Germany; he messaged to say he had driven it all the way to his sons base with not a glitch or hiccup. The downside was, he said, that he liked it that much for the money that he was searching for one for himself....
Genuinely think these are nice little things, although the yellow highlights that came on the example in the advert always turned me cold.
I do believe that yellow was the most common colour btw...
Then a friend and I bought 3 on the trot, a couple of 135’s and a Trophy.
The scales fell from my eyes, and I realised what a bargain they were, £ for £ (or Ib)
The last one we bought cost us £475 and came from a lovely middle class lady owner who had spent £8k in servicing, maintenance etc etc over her ownership.
The gout who bought it from us for £795 got a bargain and was over the moon with it, as he bought it for his son who was in the Army in Germany; he messaged to say he had driven it all the way to his sons base with not a glitch or hiccup. The downside was, he said, that he liked it that much for the money that he was searching for one for himself....
Genuinely think these are nice little things, although the yellow highlights that came on the example in the advert always turned me cold.
I do believe that yellow was the most common colour btw...
spaximus said:
We had an MGTF which was fantastic, but let down by the head gasket failure, twice under warranty, which made my wife hate it so we sold.
It drove better than the MR2 that followed, which never had a single fault in almost 100k miles. except in the engine it was alround better than the MR2
This is my first post after reading these forums for several years. But your post prompted me to post.It drove better than the MR2 that followed, which never had a single fault in almost 100k miles. except in the engine it was alround better than the MR2
Currently own an Elise and an MR2 mk3, several Imps, a Rav4, an M3 and a Skoda Fabia.
Can you explain in your opinion how an MG TF is better than a mk3 MR2 ???? Having owned an F and a TF (actually wifes cars) I’d personally say the difference between the two cars is like the difference between an Austin Montego and a BMW 3 series.
Apart from the vehicles having an appeal and good styling, the steering input, general handling and feel, braking, fuel economy, weight, reliability, build quality etc etc are not even close. The driving position reminds me of a Bus I once drove. My wife loved the visibility after having a G reg MX5 though.
The early pre Nov 2001 1zz engines in the MR2 have piston and ring problems which allow oil to be burned and damage the pre cats. This is maybe worse than the K head gasket issue in some cars. A faulty MAF sensor can sap 30 bhp easily and fuel the myth that a MK3 MR2 is ‘slow’ even though it is about 7 secs to 60.
My MR2 gives little away to my 111s for fun, except luggage space and some communication on the limit. It has some tweaks. The last MG TF we had was like driving a Van in comparison to the 111s. In handling, steering feel, cornering power, acceleration.
ImpGT said:
This is my first post after reading these forums for several years. But your post prompted me to post.
Currently own an Elise and an MR2 mk3, several Imps, a Rav4, an M3 and a Skoda Fabia.
Can you explain in your opinion how an MG TF is better than a mk3 MR2 ???? Having owned an F and a TF (actually wifes cars) I’d personally say the difference between the two cars is like the difference between an Austin Montego and a BMW 3 series.
Apart from the vehicles having an appeal and good styling, the steering input, general handling and feel, braking, fuel economy, weight, reliability, build quality etc etc are not even close. The driving position reminds me of a Bus I once drove. My wife loved the visibility after having a G reg MX5 though.
The early pre Nov 2001 1zz engines in the MR2 have piston and ring problems which allow oil to be burned and damage the pre cats. This is maybe worse than the K head gasket issue in some cars. A faulty MAF sensor can sap 30 bhp easily and fuel the myth that a MK3 MR2 is ‘slow’ even though it is about 7 secs to 60.
My MR2 gives little away to my 111s for fun, except luggage space and some communication on the limit. It has some tweaks. The last MG TF we had was like driving a Van in comparison to the 111s. In handling, steering feel, cornering power, acceleration.
just speculating, maybe he had a mk2 mr2?Currently own an Elise and an MR2 mk3, several Imps, a Rav4, an M3 and a Skoda Fabia.
Can you explain in your opinion how an MG TF is better than a mk3 MR2 ???? Having owned an F and a TF (actually wifes cars) I’d personally say the difference between the two cars is like the difference between an Austin Montego and a BMW 3 series.
Apart from the vehicles having an appeal and good styling, the steering input, general handling and feel, braking, fuel economy, weight, reliability, build quality etc etc are not even close. The driving position reminds me of a Bus I once drove. My wife loved the visibility after having a G reg MX5 though.
The early pre Nov 2001 1zz engines in the MR2 have piston and ring problems which allow oil to be burned and damage the pre cats. This is maybe worse than the K head gasket issue in some cars. A faulty MAF sensor can sap 30 bhp easily and fuel the myth that a MK3 MR2 is ‘slow’ even though it is about 7 secs to 60.
My MR2 gives little away to my 111s for fun, except luggage space and some communication on the limit. It has some tweaks. The last MG TF we had was like driving a Van in comparison to the 111s. In handling, steering feel, cornering power, acceleration.
mk3 highly regarded
Raygun said:
Design a car that looks spot-on with a sporty engine let down by dodgy head gaskets which I'm led to believe was soon sorted by an after-market company ala Triumph Stag. It's so ludicrous to be let down like this it makes you wonder if a certain element wanted it to fail.
There are other issues particularly with the VVC which an ex Rover engineer told me about...bit if digging and it is something discussed widely opn MG Rover forums but not on Lotus ones.The engines with VVC use engine oil to operate VVC hydraulic system. The system monitors oil temps and works out (taking into account the viscosity) how long the system will take to operate. When they programmed the temperature to viscosity process oil was somewhat different to what it is now.
Synthetic oils avaiable at the time the system was designed (or whatever they called them
were different to Synthetic oils available in the past decade or so. Modern synthetic oils don't do the VVC mechanisms any good as they maintain a quite precise viscosity to temperature ratio. This makes the sliding blocks wear out quicker. You could argue that this was a big oversight by Rover engineers as they didn’t take into account the changing oil technology.
CABC said:
just speculating, maybe he had a mk2 mr2?
mk3 highly regarded
The MK3 has it’s own problems, but dynamically...although I don’t rate EVO mag it was much better in days gone by. Editon 017 tested the MR2 (was actually an imported MR-S with no LSD and a 20kg higher kerb weight) against a mk2 MX5 and an MGF. They thought it was SO good they added an extra review vs a Boxster and Elise and still said it was awesome.mk3 highly regarded
Once you tweak the things they truly are cheap Elise alternatives.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff