They should have used the VVC. I never tired of its acceleration. 0-60 is exhilarating and 60-100 is effortless on the motorway. Totnes to heathrow in 2 hours. and back again i wasn't even tired, in contrast with doing the same journey in a mondeo which took almost double the time and knackered me out!
Must mean its good if he liked it. Yes they are surprisingly not tiring cars. I think it's the acceleration from 50-95 that is so effortless on the motorway. In the mondoe i was constantly egging it on. And the seats are superb too. :)
I drove an MGF when they were new, and the hydrogas suspension was awful. I felt like the suspension was made from a blancmange. Also, I am 5'9" and when I was seated comfortably in the driver's seat all I saw when I looked forward was the top of the windscreen surround. I feel that with lower seats and springs instead of the hydrogas system, giving the car a "sporty" rather than "limousine-like" feel it would have been almost a world beater. Fixing the dreaded head gasket problem before releasing the car, and you would have a world beater on your hands.
Its funny because I have heard this from others.... presumably who drove cars which didn't have any gas in the suspension. Sure it might look lower and you'd presume that makes it drive well but its the opposite. The suspension is genius, if set up properly there's no body roll, you can feel everything and yet its not too uncomfortable. Its very hard certainly but its supposed to be. For the record I am 6'2" and no problems with visibility either. The cure for head-gasket failure was the improved gasket design. Mobile mechanics can do the job for £300 so its not the end of the world.
All this is true, but as a new car I would have presumed the hydrogas suspension had gas in it? I admit part of the visibility problem is because I like to sit more upright than many people who like to recline more when driving. Yes, the TF had firmer suspension, but it also had coil springs. I haven't driven a TF, but I have been told by people who have they give a better ride.
@@stuart7515 Its just very odd because I have heard other people say similar and it really doesn't match my experience. My other car was a Fiat Coupe 20vt, famed for being the fastest fwd car when it was produced and that out handles everything. My MGFs ride has just as much feel and feels harder than that did.
@@Daveyboyz1978 I am not arguing, simply stating that my experience is different to yours. I have heard there are some minor modifications that can be done to the suspension that can make a huge difference. Maybe something like that was done with your car? Ihave driven an MGF with a slightly modified suspension (just pressures changed in the gas and the liquid, and the way they flowed) and it was brilliant! Why didn't they do this as standard? have two MGFs at home which I am restoring. I like the car dispite the soft standard suspension. With a few tweaks I hope to get them as good as you say your car is.
@@stuart7515 i recommend poly bushes and adjustable shock absorbers. Also being on 16" wheels (lower profiles make the ride harder and also fit over the brake upgrades) When I bought mine it was standard and felt good... then there was a period it felt bad (bad tyre choice and badly set up) now it feels even better) Having xpower hoops adds to the rigidity of the car as does adding the cross struts found on later models.
MGF did not stand the test of time, even with such a strong market for an MG banged car mid engined metro with dodgy handling high geared and rubbish engine note and Japanese look side and back ( not idea why was all rover just a bad design) Sure it sold, as any MG sports car would but how many people want them now, cant given them away used. 24 years on, in 1996 a 1972 MG still cost some money and was desirable its still Bs the MG people want these are like they never existed. I had B loved it drove one these it was ok but nothing compared to B in any respect. It had low insurance as young men would not drive one middle aged men and a few younger women
The design was actually excellent and won many plaudits and was voted by many car magazines including auto car as the best road holding of any of the current crop of sports cars of that time and voted best convertible by auto car.It also was the best selling roadster throughout it's production beating the mx5, I can't understand people like you talking such rubbish look at trophy cars in Peterborough sells hundreds of mgf and mgtf a year.look at what honest John has to say on google he gives the mgf 4 stars and as for the mgb arthritic 0 to 60 time of 12 seconds the 1.8 mgf vvc 7 seconds yeah mgb so much better look at top gears 1997 best handling sports cars test porsches elise and Subaru to name a few mgf landed 3rd spot yeah rubbish?
Holy shit! Clarkson liked it!
They should have used the VVC. I never tired of its acceleration. 0-60 is exhilarating and 60-100 is effortless on the motorway. Totnes to heathrow in 2 hours. and back again i wasn't even tired, in contrast with doing the same journey in a mondeo which took almost double the time and knackered me out!
+Matthew Cooper Once drove my 1.6 for 12 hours straight, all the way from London to SE France. Great car - surprised Clarkson liked it though.
Must mean its good if he liked it. Yes they are surprisingly not tiring cars. I think it's the acceleration from 50-95 that is so effortless on the motorway. In the mondoe i was constantly egging it on. And the seats are superb too. :)
Bollocks at twice the time.
You ever owned one of these? If not then your opinion is invalid. So say something sensible that we can DISCUSS or stfu. :)
Thought I recognized the scenery. Clarkson is driving the MGF in and around Balsall Common in Warwickshire.
That car is still around :)
I drove an MGF when they were new, and the hydrogas suspension was awful. I felt like the suspension was made from a blancmange. Also, I am 5'9" and when I was seated comfortably in the driver's seat all I saw when I looked forward was the top of the windscreen surround. I feel that with lower seats and springs instead of the hydrogas system, giving the car a "sporty" rather than "limousine-like" feel it would have been almost a world beater. Fixing the dreaded head gasket problem before releasing the car, and you would have a world beater on your hands.
Its funny because I have heard this from others.... presumably who drove cars which didn't have any gas in the suspension. Sure it might look lower and you'd presume that makes it drive well but its the opposite. The suspension is genius, if set up properly there's no body roll, you can feel everything and yet its not too uncomfortable. Its very hard certainly but its supposed to be.
For the record I am 6'2" and no problems with visibility either.
The cure for head-gasket failure was the improved gasket design. Mobile mechanics can do the job for £300 so its not the end of the world.
All this is true, but as a new car I would have presumed the hydrogas suspension had gas in it? I admit part of the visibility problem is because I like to sit more upright than many people who like to recline more when driving. Yes, the TF had firmer suspension, but it also had coil springs. I haven't driven a TF, but I have been told by people who have they give a better ride.
@@stuart7515 Its just very odd because I have heard other people say similar and it really doesn't match my experience. My other car was a Fiat Coupe 20vt, famed for being the fastest fwd car when it was produced and that out handles everything. My MGFs ride has just as much feel and feels harder than that did.
@@Daveyboyz1978 I am not arguing, simply stating that my experience is different to yours. I have heard there are some minor modifications that can be done to the suspension that can make a huge difference. Maybe something like that was done with your car? Ihave driven an MGF with a slightly modified suspension (just pressures changed in the gas and the liquid, and the way they flowed) and it was brilliant! Why didn't they do this as standard? have two MGFs at home which I am restoring. I like the car dispite the soft standard suspension. With a few tweaks I hope to get them as good as you say your car is.
@@stuart7515 i recommend poly bushes and adjustable shock absorbers. Also being on 16" wheels (lower profiles make the ride harder and also fit over the brake upgrades)
When I bought mine it was standard and felt good... then there was a period it felt bad (bad tyre choice and badly set up) now it feels even better)
Having xpower hoops adds to the rigidity of the car as does adding the cross struts found on later models.
Which episode is this?!?!?!?!
he left his tonneau cover behind :(
Haha I thought that when he threw it away but when he drives off, it's back on lol
You can almost make out a car, not sure what make though
everyone was once young
So all these years later were they better than an MX5 ?
sunnygxracer imo: nope but they're more unique
I wouldn't swap but the MG has more wrinkles, it was designed on a shoe string.
Filmed on a trodden cheeseburger
MGF did not stand the test of time, even with such a strong market for an MG banged car mid engined metro with dodgy handling high geared and rubbish engine note and Japanese look side and back ( not idea why was all rover just a bad design) Sure it sold, as any MG sports car would but how many people want them now, cant given them away used. 24 years on, in 1996 a 1972 MG still cost some money and was desirable its still Bs the MG people want these are like they never existed. I had B loved it drove one these it was ok but nothing compared to B in any respect. It had low insurance as young men would not drive one middle aged men and a few younger women
The design was actually excellent and won many plaudits and was voted by many car magazines including auto car as the best road holding of any of the current crop of sports cars of that time and voted best convertible by auto car.It also was the best selling roadster throughout it's production beating the mx5, I can't understand people like you talking such rubbish look at trophy cars in Peterborough sells hundreds of mgf and mgtf a year.look at what honest John has to say on google he gives the mgf 4 stars and as for the mgb arthritic 0 to 60 time of 12 seconds the 1.8 mgf vvc 7 seconds yeah mgb so much better look at top gears 1997 best handling sports cars test porsches elise and Subaru to name a few mgf landed 3rd spot yeah rubbish?
Absolute tosh!