since the early 1980's there have been a variety of badge-engineered MG's.some of them have been reasonably good cars.and some of them have been an absolute affront to the proud octagonal badge.
Growing up in the UK i have saw pretty much all of the badge engineered cars and i have my opinion of each of them;

1) The MG Metro.
An austin,austin-rover,then rover metro.tricked out with bucket seats,red carpet and seatbelts.Then a turbo was slapped as if to say to John Cooper"See?thats how you make the 1275 A-series engine go."Most metro turbos ended up crashed.Having spent all that money making the car go,they hadnt spent the same effort making it stop.
Verdict.a curiously cute little car.but not worthy of the MG marque.

2) The MG Maestro.
Same austin history and tricked out same as the Metro,the 2000cc 8-valve O-series was a capable,if rather ugly,hot hatch.Then 505 of them were fitted with a tickford(of aston martin fame)turbo,making the car ridiculously quick,in fact it was the fastest hot hatch in its class,and could keep up with the legendary Ford Sierra RS cosworth,even though its underpinnings were antiquated compared to the Sierra's overengineered heart.Sadly they rusted even faster than they drove and few survive.there was a Maestro turbo on ebay just before xmas,and it was rotten.
Verdict.an ugly uninspiring design with crazy-ass speed.and also unworthy of the MG marque.

3) The MG Montego.
Basically a maestro with a boot(trunk).Also got the Turbo treatment.ive never driven one,but my husband did..once.he said the torque steer bordered on terrifying and he nearly buried it in the side of a nearby car.
Verdict.not even worthy of the tyres.putting an MG badge on this car is like putting a Bentley badge on a skateboard.

4) The MG RV8.
A testament to how the B wouldve looked had it continued in production,and how the rubber bumpers ought to have looked.from the rear it looks like a small rolls-royce corniche,even if the tail lights are from a london TX1 taxi.
Verdict.A true MG.

5) The MGF/MGTF.
Tricky one.Not a badge-engineered Rover,but the K-series engine is an oversized late model rover metro engine,and the hydro-pneumatic suspension is from the metro too.and the engine is behind the seats.and its not very british looking is it?
Verdict.Im sitting on the fence on this one.

6) The MG versions of the Rover 25,45,and 75.
Rover shouldve just called these cars GTI or whatever.
Verdict.Not real MG's

7) The Rover MG 25,45 and 75.
Renamed when Rover became RoverMG.
Verdict.Every time i see one i want to remove the MG badge.

Whats everyone elses opinion ?

Ooo.....this should be interesting.

I can't comment on 1-3 and 6-7 as we never had these models in Canada. I'll reserve my comments for 4 & 5.

Being a bit biased, I agree on the RV8 as being the natural evolution of the MGB. it still looks like a B but brought up to the styling trends of the 90's. The V8 is a natural in this car and although it still uses leaf springs in the back as opposed to IRS, it works just fine. It seems the RV8 was the MGC of its day by getting a bad rap from the press but I can't agree with the comments written back then. 2000 were built....2000 were sold.

I like the MGF but a bit disappointed it didn't come out with a front-engine, rear-drive format. I know a couple of the guys here in Canada who have them and they liike them, warts and all. Once the issues are worked out, they're good cars. It's too bad that they're being scrapped because of minor issues back in the UK.

I likely won't get one only because I don't need another two-seater. Besides, 16 hungry cylinders to feed is enough....for now.

---

"Speed costs........how fast you want to spend?"

I don't understand point 7, how can you remove an MG badge from a Rover 25/45/75? These were badged as Rovers, not MGs. Isn't Point 6 the same as Point 7?

The only ones I don't consider true MGs are:

MG BGT V8 (1974-76) - why a V8? MG were renowned for extracting much from little. None of the record breakers or motorsport successes were founded on muscle car engines.

MG RV8 - wrong engine (should have been a T16 turbo 2L imho), and the fact most sold to the Japanese suggests it was either too expensive or just not what was wanted by the average enthusiast. Oh, and it should have had a chrome grille at the front, and less of a boulevard cruiser interior.

MG ZT 260 - as above...

MG SV - as above and also too expensive.

For me, true MGs that I have either owned or been in include all the ones hated by the purists. Why? Simply because, to me, these cars capture the spirit of Safety Fast offering affordable fun motoring, based on raiding the parts bin that has been the hallmark of MG in both saloon and sports car form since 1925. I also respect some of the models that have helped to keep the brand alive at a time when it was in danger of disappearing, such as the MMM range of the 80s. One must also respect the fact that the MG ZR/ZS/ZT range (2001-2005) brought many new enthusiasts to the MG community and that can only be a good thing for the longer term survival of the MGOC/MGCC etc. The fact the ZR was a best selling hot hatch in the UK says something about the MG-ness of it that the ZR has such appeal amongst younger buyers. More to the point, if MG (or it's parent company, be it Rover, or Austin Rover etc) were not selling mainstream models in volume, then there is no business case for simply making sports cars, so be grateful to those of us that like our MG served up in saloon form as well as sports car form.

All brands evolve with time and market pressure, one cannot live in the past. In fact, I like the MGF and TF especially because it challenged the tradition that a sports car must be front engined and RWD. Ok, part of the problem for the Rover engineers was trying to not look like they were copying the MX5, but they made it work, enough that it out-sold the MX5 in the UK. But so long as there is respect for the heritage, and at least some of that historical appeal encompassed in some shape or form, then I don't see much wrong with the MG range that we have been offered over the last 50 years.

Octagonomania is like the bible; open to so many interpretations.

---

Martin W
Moderns: 2011 MG6 GT TSE & 2010 MG TF LE500
Old'erns: 1966 MGB GT, 1968 MG 1300 MkII (4dr) & 1968 MkII MG 1300 (2dr)
www.upgrades4mgs.co.uk, www.oils4mgs.co.uk, www.austinapache.co.uk, www.minisa.co.uk

The only real MGs were built in the Alfred Road shop. Everything after that was just rubbish.
What were they thinking building the M Type? Wasn't the Bullnose good enough for them?
Hrrumph!!

---

Modern MGs aren't just Transportation, They're a Hobby!

As per Wikipedia the definition of "badge engineering"

Badge engineering is an ironic term that describes the rebadging (that is, the replacement of the branding trademark) of one product (especially automobiles) as another. Due to the high cost of designing and engineering a totally new model, or establishing a new brand (which may take many years to gain acceptance), it is often more cost-effective to rebadge a single product multiple times.

The term derives from the trademark emblems fastened inside or onto the outside of the car. While differences were originally confined to the badges used on the model, more typically it involves slight styling differences, usually limited to the headlights, tail lights, and front and rear fascias. More extreme examples involve differing engines and drivetrains.

Badge engineering is now common, but it should not be confused with platform sharing within a company. Platform sharing is different from rebadging, as an automobile platform may be used in many different ways and applications, such as using a single platform to produce and sell a sedan and a sport utility vehicle. Two such products are different vehicles, whereas badge engineering involves the sale of essentially a single vehicle.

C'est what????

I'm thinking the K-series HGF issue isn't something to be proud of. I know there's fixes now but perhaps the engineers could have spent a bit longer on development back in the early 90's.

---

"Speed costs........how fast you want to spend?"

Blame the accountants, not the engineers, their hands were tied. The fixes put in place in China on the K Series were the ones they wanted to develop in the 90s when they enlarged the engine capacity and went to damp liners.

---

Martin W
Moderns: 2011 MG6 GT TSE & 2010 MG TF LE500
Old'erns: 1966 MGB GT, 1968 MG 1300 MkII (4dr) & 1968 MkII MG 1300 (2dr)
www.upgrades4mgs.co.uk, www.oils4mgs.co.uk, www.austinapache.co.uk, www.minisa.co.uk

marin,with point 7 i was meaning the final days of rover,when they changed brandname to RoverMG,and even the entry level basic Rover 25 had an MG badge on it too.
When Lionel Morris agreed to merge with Austin back in the day it was on the proviso that standard production cars never bear the MG marque.

I fully agree with this comment but adding that North American opinions vary dramatically as we have been without the MG Badged cars since 1980 and Rover ones since 1982, so we get a little excited with MG cars that are 15 years "new" to us.

It' a 400PD fix (in the UK) when it happens and not that hard to DIY and IMHO addition of a coolant alarm dramtically reduces premature failure. I have seen much newer cars (low and high end included) have more serious issues much earlier on in their life(both in mileage and age) and at much greater cost. When you buy a 15 yr old car you must expect hoses, gaskets, etc., to start failing but in the MGF's case corrosion and higher mileages (especially on UK cars) increases maintenance costs.

I fully agree the engineers missed the boat when it comes to HGF, but IMHO MG Rover just didn't have the resources available to do a volountary recall program and fix the problem when it first rose it's ugly head!!!

I had Land Rover Canada replace (under warranty) the 2.5 V6 engine in my wifes 2004 Freelander 5 times (YES 5 TIMES) due to engine failure. At no time would they pay the dealer technician to strip the engine and repair it properly, they just kept sending complete engines. In the end they ran out of engines and started scrapping brand new vehicles to replace engines on customers vehicles! They were some happy when the Freelanders went out of warranty!

It was said that Rolls Royce could not be used as a badge on a car if it went into foreign ownership. It still happened. I am not saying that that is acceptable business practice ignoring the wishes of the founder, but as I have never heard of this statement nor of Lionel Morris, I fear I must do some more reading on the history of the merger.

From 2000 onwards the company was known as MG Rover, but the models were separately badged as either Rover 25/45/75 or MG ZR/ZS/ZT. Prior to 2000, MG was just a model name attached to a car and in fact all the MG Fs and RV8s sold in Japan (as well as Minis) had to have a Rover badge on them to denote the actual manufacturer. When the Phoenix 4 took over, the company acquired the MG, Austin, Morris and Wolseley brands but only the rights to use the Rover name from BMW who also retained the Triumph and Riley names, along with any names pertaining to the Mini. Consequently, although called MG Rover and operating out of the same dealerships as a company the cars were badged separately and marketed separately. In essence I don't think anyone saw a Rover as an MG, and most thought the MGs were rebadged Rovers, which they weren't necessarily, having far more mechanical changes than just a badge and a few spoilers. To drive a Rover versus an MG version is like chalk and cheese.

John, good point, the US airmen going home after the war probably set in stone the image of MG as a small two seater sports car and the US demand is what kept the company in business. However, it's difficult to perceive a saloon as being a fun drive. On the surface, it looks conventional and boring, but 7 yrs spent in the driver's seat of my own MG ZT put as many smiles on my face as I get out of my 1966 MGB GT or my MG TF, and the MG6 is doing the same for me again! Why settle for a mediocre saloon when fun can be had from one with an MG badge on it, rightly or wrongly.

---

Martin W
Moderns: 2011 MG6 GT TSE & 2010 MG TF LE500
Old'erns: 1966 MGB GT, 1968 MG 1300 MkII (4dr) & 1968 MkII MG 1300 (2dr)
www.upgrades4mgs.co.uk, www.oils4mgs.co.uk, www.austinapache.co.uk, www.minisa.co.uk

Regarding the MGF/TF how you describe the F sounds like you are describing the B, bits and pieces from different parts bins.

Regarding the engine in the back, the lads at the Abingdon design office came up with this idea and proposed ADO21 as the replacement for the MGB/TR6. Unfortunately they went with the TR7.

---

Canadian Modern MG Rover Car Club - www.cmmgrcc.org

Perhaps,yes.But im describing what it is.the K-series engine was lifted out of other rovers,and the suspension setup is from the metro.
As i said though,I cant decide on the MGF/TF.It is definitely a real MG.It just looks a little bit japanese,that's all.Although i reckon a GT coupe version of it wouldve been cool

When you consider that it would cost GB£400 for a new air-bag module in the driver's seat of an MX5 Mk3 (I know) it's a relatively small price dealing with the HGF but that doesn't help when you are stranded in the middle of nowhere late for a meeting. As I said the engineers knew what the fixes were, their hands were tied by budgets. To date Ian Pogson of the SMTC has repeatedlyt stated that none of the N-Series (the Nanjing K Series) or the TCi-Tec (SAIC's reverse engineered K Series have had a gasket issue after being extensively tested with improvements to the casting quality etc.

The K Series should never have been enlarged, though, the T Series should have been evolved instead but money did not allow it and thuswhat was designed as a fuel efficient, low emissions engine in the late 1980s was developed into a 1.8L engine expected to drag around the larger Rover/MG saloons and the LR Freelander.

The early KV6 units that replaced the Honda 2.7 V6 were notorious for HGF and this was also noted in the Kia Sedona wagon resulting in many unhappy owners. But this was pretty much resolved for the 75 launch in 1999 and as it had convetional head bolt technology it was less likely to suffer issues than the K4. However, again, issues such as thermostat leakages or corroded mild steel coolant pipes could result in a loss of coolant sufficient to result in HGF. Also, the fan controller unit (Siemens) was known to burn out the bushes on the lower speeds and that could result in overheating. Generally, the KV6 from 1999 was not known for any HGF issues amongst the MG Rover ZT/75 community (in fact the 75/ZT regularly featured highly, and still do, in the reliability tables in the UK). I could be wrong about the LR Freelander though, but few KV6 Freelanders were sold in the UK compared to overseas markets. I know of one particular issue on a 2002 Rover 75 KV6 where the perpetual coolant problem was eventually traced to a poor quality of head casting and porosity allowing the coolant to leak into the engine. It sounds like you had a pretty raw deal on these engines in NA, but it is also quite common here to just ship a new engine to the dealer rather than strip and repair.

---

Martin W
Moderns: 2011 MG6 GT TSE & 2010 MG TF LE500
Old'erns: 1966 MGB GT, 1968 MG 1300 MkII (4dr) & 1968 MkII MG 1300 (2dr)
www.upgrades4mgs.co.uk, www.oils4mgs.co.uk, www.austinapache.co.uk, www.minisa.co.uk

Weren't most early MGs just a Morris chassis with engines from others? Admittedly, some engines were developed specifically by MG but from the merger onwards the A and B Series engines that were the mainstay of the 1100, Midget and MGA, B, and Magnette were originally Austin engines, perhaps the C Series being one of the few developed just for MG. The V8 wasn't even a British engine, either as a Buick or a Ford as used in the ZT260 or SV. In fact the O Series engines used in the Maestro and Montego were originally developed to replace the B Series in the MGB but that never happened, so arguably these engines were very much MG.

Even before the ADO21 concept there was a FWD Mini based prototype (ADO34) that would have been the MG Midget.

Gerry McGovern supposedly styled the MGF front around the late model MGBs, building on the scalloped headlights and the central plinth dividing the grille. In fact an MGF front badge on the shield fits the rubber bumper perfectly on an MGB as if it were made for it. Following the brief flash of the MG EX-E in 1985, there were three prototypes that lead to the MGF; PR1 (FWD), PR2 (V8 front engine, RWD) and PR3 (mid-engined, RWD) but all of these were the fruit of Rover's special projects division when MG was just a badge rather than an actual company as it was from 2000. The Japanese look of the TF can be blamed on Peter Stevens who in my opinion cocked up the styling of all the MGs and Rovers. Sadly, the TF Coupe never quite made it into production, although it was shown in late 2004 alongside an equally gorgeous looking Rover 75 Coupe, with a KV6 mid-mounted engine just prior to the collapse. The big problem with a mid-engined coupe is making access to the engine possible, although others like GTM managed to do it by a clamshell rear end but that would have meant significant changes to the TF.

Whether it's an MG, well, I think the the F is, others won't. They were never as welcome on the club circles as they ar enow when they were first launched, but that seems to be true of any MG, especially when they started putting wind-up windows on the MGB!

---

Martin W
Moderns: 2011 MG6 GT TSE & 2010 MG TF LE500
Old'erns: 1966 MGB GT, 1968 MG 1300 MkII (4dr) & 1968 MkII MG 1300 (2dr)
www.upgrades4mgs.co.uk, www.oils4mgs.co.uk, www.austinapache.co.uk, www.minisa.co.uk

The Rover engine thing doesn't wash. Both TVR and Morgan never used an engine they built themselves. They always bought them from outside. International component sourcing is even more pronounced than it used to be. Literally every modern car is an accumulation of parts from the worldwide parts bin.

---

Modern MGs aren't just Transportation, They're a Hobby!

ok,i think we can establish that the MGF/TF is in no doubt a real MG.

The first MG was only a slightly reworked and rebadged Morris Oxford. Badge engineering is nothing new.
The P type guys derided the TA because it wasn't OHC.

The TC guys derided the TD because it had IFS.

The MGA guys derided the MGB because it didn't have a chassis.

Nobody thinks the new model is any good for many reasons but acceptance comes eventually.

Life changes, things move on.

---

Member of The International Society of Luddites (Unrepentant Chapter).

Take the time to understand what a part does and how it does it, then you'll have a better understanding of how to fix it when it goes wrong. Beats the scattergun approach every time.

Ignition testing made easy.

Making your MGB handbrake work

My You Tube Channel

Life with an MG TA and an MGB GT in the UK.

If it's got an MG badge on it, it's an MG.

Too much is being read into this. The brand still exists. The company that owns it has money. Money is good and apparently being spent in the area of research & development.

If it wasn't for one man's vision back in the 20's, we wouldn't even have a car brand to talk about.

If you want some entertainment, read the comments posted on the other forums when someone starts a thread about modern MG's.

---

"Speed costs........how fast you want to spend?"