(first posted 8/7/2012) In MG Sporting Saloons Part One we saw the more traditional interpretations on the sporty family saloon. This time we’ll watch MG try to spice things up with front-wheel drive, hatchbacks and turbos. They even attempted to go high-tech in the early 1980s with digital dashes and voice control. Despite this, bespoke saloon designs were no more, as every car was based heavily on the offerings of the current parent company. A somewhat predictable trend, but who could have guessed the most quintessential British brand would end up in China?
First up is the MG 1100, which along with its many badge-engineered siblings, is also known as the ADO16. These really deserve an article all to themselves (ED: Coming soon, as I’ve found one). Essentially, they’re a big brother to the popular Mini, with front-wheel drive, a transversely mounted A-series engine and Hydrolastic suspension. There were two- and four-door versions available; the two-doors proved to be more popular with the buying public. The 1100 brought MG a bit of racing success in the 1963 Monte Carlo Rally, with a fourth-in-class finish. A 1275cc version of the A-series came along later, as the 1300 model.
An optional four-speed automatic transmission became available but proved to be less than durable; unlike the manual gearbox, the automatic wasn’t happy sharing oil with the engine. The 1100 / 1300 cars turned out to be very popular, and they remain much loved in the UK. The 1100 was discontinued in 1969; the 1300, in 1973.
It would be almost another ten years before the next MG for the family man came along in the form of the 1980 Austin Metro, which launched to great success in its home market. The MG version that debuted in 1982 was pitched as sportier, with an uprated 1275cc, 72-hp version of the now-dated 60-hp A-series engine in the Austin. While they weren’t as well-built as some of the foreign competition, the Austin version in particular sold very well in the UK, riding atop a wave of national pride.
The MG versions sported a full complement of MG badges, a sportier steering wheel and lots of red accents to complete the transformation. New to the range was a turbo model with a stiffer suspension and 93 hp on tap.
In addition to their Austin Metro variant, MG offered a version of the Austin Maestro hatchback. Launched in 1983 (with a rather troublesome 1.6-liter engine) the MG received an improved and fuel-injected 2.0-liter engine the following year. Unlike the Metro, with its transmission-under-engine and Hydragas suspension system, the Maestro was a rather conventional front-wheel drive car with an on-end gearbox, a MacPherson strut front suspension and a torsion beam suspension in back. The Maestro was very much in the Volkswagen Golf mode; in fact, the MG version was pitched as being somewhat equivalent to the GTi. A turbo variant, which MG offered from 1989 until 1991, actually reverted to using a carburetor! Its performance was impressive–0-60 in 6.7 seconds–but only 505 were sold.
The Austin Montego four-door sedan also spawned an MG version. Once again, the MG was pitched as being slightly sportier than its Austin half-brother. It featured some pretty high-tech kit for the times, including hidden wipers, voice reminders and controls, and digital gauges. Unfortunately, build quality was uneven, especially with the earlier cars. In 1985, MG introduced a 150-hp turbocharged Montego; it was the fastest production MG to date.
After the 1994 demise of MG’s Montego came another lengthy absence of MG saloons; it finally ended in 2001, when Rover-MG launched its Z-Series. The Zs were based on Rover saloons and hatchbacks, cars widely perceived as being somewhat stodgy and geriatric–British Buicks, perhaps. The MG ZR, based on the Rover 25 hatchback, featured body cladding along with a palette of bright exterior colors. Engines, all with four cylinders, ranged from 1.4-liters to 2.0-liters in size. As a sign of the times, one could even get a diesel engine in their MG ZR!
The MG ZS, a mid-size sedan based on the Rover 45, came along after BMW sold off its interest in Rover. The ZR’s recipe of bright colors and a body kit was once again used to dress things up. The ZS featured sharper suspension tuning and offered an optional 175-hp, 2.5-liter V6 for fitting performance. A range of four-cylinder engines were also available. The ZS proved to be a reasonably successful effort at a sports saloon, largely thanks to the Honda DNA it shared with the donor Rover 45.
The last of the modern British MG saloons is the ZT; once again, it’s based on a Rover design, this time the big 75. Aimed at the sporting executive market (think BMW, Audi, etc.) the MG offered much sportier styling than the Rover’s. Engine choices comprised a 1.8-liter K-series four-cylinder, a BMW 2.0-liter diesel, and a range-topping 2.5-liter V6. For those with such a hankering, an MG station wagon, the MG ZT-T, was available for the first time. In 2003 came the 260 version of the ZT–with rear-wheel drive and a Ford 4.6-liter V8 engine, it was MG’s mightiest production saloon ever.
In 2005, MG Rover went bankrupt, once again putting a halt to MG production. The company was purchased by Nanjing Automobile of China. Although MG’s Honda-based designs were off limits, Nanjing put the ZT back into production, for China, as the MG 7. They also produced the MG 3 as a re-badged Rover Streetwise hatchback prior to its 2011 redesign. There are plans for MG to re-enter the UK market, but the official timeline always seems to have a target date of “soon”.
So in conclusion: If someone at the local pub claims that MG made only sports cars, now you can confidently tell them, “bollocks!” Often did MG cater to the family man–at least in its home market, and now China.
Curious thing about European or British cars: Their “saloons” or sedans. If you ordered power windows, only the front windows were powered, the rear windows were still hand-cranked.
The only time I saw that on an American car was the first-gen Neon, but as the back window only rolled down not quite 1/3 of the way, I guess it made no sense to power it…
The second generation Neon has the same thing. It is a bit odd. I’m not a huge fan of power windows but the best thing about them is the driver’s ability to lock the rear windows.
I am reminded of a neighbor’s 1954 Chevy Bel Air sedan, which had power brakes, steering, and power only to the front door windows.
That was more of a spec level thing. Mid-spec cars got powered front windows, top spec got all four. Was fairly standard for years, especially among Fords – it’s within the last 4-5 years that the Australian base model Falcon received rear power windows to go with the front ones.
‘taint necessarily so – as NZ Skyliner points out this is a spec-level differentiator. My old ’96 Saab 9000 had power windows on all four, but yes some manufacturers had mid-range cars with only power on the front windows.
Odder still, some manufacturers differentiated driver’s and passenger’s windows: my 2001 FIAT Bravo had power to both front windows but only “one-touch” opening & closing on the driver’s.
It isn’t unusual to have one-touch windows only on the driver’s door, because one-touch closing requires anti-pinching. Not insurmountable, but it’s one more complication for a feature of little added value for passengers.
My MG Montego 2.0i saloon and both my MG ZS 180 saloons have electric windows.
IIRC, Saturn SLs did the same window thing, too.
Spent a lot of my childhood in a Peugeot 604, which definitely had power rear windows (and power sunroof). Golf IIIs also had 4-door power windows in the 90s.
I believe that the BMW E9 (2800 CS etc.) had power rear windows and manual front windows, although power front were an option. I think the reasoning was that the back seat was usually not occupied and it would be awkward to roll down manual windows, but the front window winders are easier to reach.
I await the article on the ADO16 as my first set of wheels was a ’65 MG 1100.
Some of those Chinese MGs actually are on the UK market, and have attracted lukewarm reviews.
See http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/mg/mg6 for example.
Yes the MG6 is currently finished in the UK various components before being delivered to the dealer. Sales numbers are not great when they up against the Ford Focus and such. Maybe more sales will come when they introduce a diesel engine.
Even here in China, where I live, I don’t see too many MG’s. I see the odd MG 7 and occasionally an MG 6 on the street, but it seems most people prefer to purchase Japanese or European cars. MG just came out with the MG 5, which has been heavily promoted both in print and on television, but I’ve only seen a couple.
I know someone who has a MG Maestro turbo its been a reliable rocketship from new its still around and the guy said it would never be sold.
The new MG6 hatch is here in New Zealand already; apparently its Magnette-badged sedan version is imminent. I pass an orange MG6 hatch (pictured below) on the motorway commute most days. Interesting car, not as evocative as earlier models though.
We got all the Metro/Maestro/Montego/ZR/ZS/ZT iterations through the years too. A friend had a 1987/88 MG Montego Si from 1995ish for a few years. Looked good, went well, but the devil had possessed the steering. It was the worst steering vehicle I’ve ever driven. You’d turn the steering wheel a quarter turn from centre, and the car would never respond the same way. Sometimes it’d turn more sharply, sometimes less; sometimes that quarter turn would be freeplay and the car would continue straight ahead; sometimes the car would take bites at the corner instead of following a linear motion. I took it to my trusted mechanic (a British Leyland-trained Jag specialist) and he found nothing wrong with it. I gave it back to my friend with the suggestion he try garlic and holy water, he was not amused….
The Montego didn’t live up to MG heritage, but the ZT and ZT-T were pretty cool though. Quite a few were sold here, and we even got the odd ZT 260 sedan (and its Rover V8 stablemate). I was following a ZT 260 on the motorway recently, it was a naff beige colour but sounded awesome.
Your steering issues on the Monty Si are not typical. There was definitely something amiss with your example even if your “trusted mechanic” couldn’t find it.
Not picking on you in particular but your comment is one of the real negatives of this internet age.
While I am sure your comment was true and honestly presented it nonetheless presents the view that “Montegos steer like shit” and now readers all around the world with no personal experience of them will take that as being fact.
As I said, not criticising you and I know there is no solution but it just bugs me that “bad news” travels so much faster than good news and can unfairly tarnish the reputation of a vehicle.
Now, if you had said “the torque steer on the Monty Turbo was monumentally bad” (as in; you could change lanes to overtake without turning the steering wheel bad) or “any Montego feels like it is becoming airborne over 90 mph” then I wouldn’t be disagreeing with you.
(Now wait for someone to tell me I am also wrong and unfairly slagging the poor old Monty….LOL)
Actually, I like Montegos! Probably helped because my Dad was an Austin-Rover mechanic when the Montego came out when I was a child and he liked the wagons. I still have the sales brochures he gave me at the time, and the press pack is probably in my collection too. My steering experiences were absolutely true for that particular example, but I didn’t mean to imply that all Montegos were like that. I had a very similar intermittent steering issue with my former Nissan Laurel 3-4 years ago, which turned out to be a failed internal rack bush and tooth damage, so I’d surmise that the Montego had a similar undiagnosed affliction (from memory it had done well over 300,000km). So, to clarify, my noting of the steering issues in my friend’s Montego weren’t intended to be representative of all Montegos, especially not when I like them, so apologies if it was interpreted that way.
These cars always make me sad, even while I was growing up with some of the earlier ones… the MG Metro always struck me as particularly risible: a sports car badge on a shopping trolley. Sad little beastie.
I was never fooled by the badge engineered Austin/Rover mush. IMO the MG marque would have been better served kept exclusive to genuine sports cars, instead of being Austin/Rover’s “GTi”.
As for the Chinese ones… the less said the better.
I don’t think there was an attempt to fool people that thay were actually MGs, whatever an MG really was by then anyway. Clearly it was nothing more than a “trim level” no more or less than an L, SL, LX or whatever.
As such I thought they worked very well in adding a little cachet to otherwise mundane models.
The MG ‘Monstros’ (Montego/Maestro) were very similar in style and driving experience to the Omni GLH in execution and torque steer (as noted by NZ Skyliner’s mate’s experience). As an American expat, I’ve driven both- and can say that they are both amazingly fun in a straight line, which is the direction the car will travel on full boost regardless of your wheel wrestling prowess. Driving a GLH in the ’90s, I was amazed by the speed that came out of one of the most mediocre cars ever to wear the pentastar. Seriously- that thing could fly- leaving only a cloud of dust and trim in its wake. The Maestro 2.0 I drove was similar- although not a turbo, it was very fast for what was by 2003 one of the most ‘uncool’ cars ever. By that time, Maestros had a reputation for being rusty cars driven by Hyacinth Bucket’s less than salubrious brother in law.
Although the Montego has a bit of a tacked on Futura style rear greenhouse (or should I say conservatory?) the hatchback Maestro is a quirky and very interesting looking car. Regardless, quality is distinctly K car Chrysler- something always falls off, yet it keeps going long after you wished it would just die. The Montego is quite similar to the high tech turbo’d Chrysler Lebaron GTS- lacking the Lebaron’s sleek styling, but still unable to tell the difference between a door and a jar.
As to the manual rear windows mentioned earlier, I think this must be an advantage when talking of ’80s BL cars- two less lucas motors to fail in the rain. However, you could still be assured that the handles will snap off in your hand.
Oh, if only it was torque steer in my friend’s one… It would do its own thing regardless of whether power was applied or not. It felt like every second or third tooth in the steering rack was missing…
The bizarre world of MG Rover- to me one of the most indecipherable manufacturing balls ups of all time!
Rover was on borrowed time by ’76 when the P6 ended production, what the directors failed to realise is that the ‘coolness’ of BMW and Mercedes was something they could never compete with. It didnt matter if Rovers were good cars or cheap, in the ’80s a Rover was synonymous with post war austerity and the elderly! How could Rover compete with the Germans, never mind cars such as the Peugeot 205??!!
As I remember, back in the early ’90s a British businesman offered to save MG-Rover. The deal was that Rover would be dumped and MG would continue alone. Unfortunately the Unions put a stop to that….
MG could have traded on their history, sporting prowess and a mass of goodwill and become a success. The answer was to produce a single, small sporting saloon in the Golf GTI manner and to produce a race car in a similar car to the Caterham. Keep it small and play to your strengths.
Jaguar and Landrover have survived as they remain niche marques and understand marketing, such a pity MG is lost. MG will never survive, even with Chinese financial clout as the car fails to deliver what the Chinese require (plus the MG name means nothing to them) and no sporting Englishman will want a Chinese made MG car with an identity crisis.
A great article of the MG Sporting Saloons.
This is what you should pose with a Concorde:
I second that emulsion
Having owned a few MG 1100’s and their younger Sibling The Austin America during my late teenaged years. I remember them fondly. I would find them all over for $50 a piece and somehow I ended up with some dealerships tools and was able to recharge the hydroelastic suspension as some of them had problems mostly sagging suspension on one side. My 1100’s got around quite well and they were a little more classy than the the Morris Minors they replaced. The woodgrain inlaid dash was a nice look and the extra two doors allowed my teenage friends easy access to catch a ride. They were roomy too. Lots of room I recall. They weren’t the heartiest of vehicles for the American roads but in the late 60’s there were good for around town. I did take one on a road trip from Tampa Florida to New Orleans. I was just there a few days when just as I was crossing the Mississippi River Bridge, the right front driveshaft cv joint blew. I tried to wedge the u-joint on the right side of the differential with a crowbar to force the car drive on the left driveshaft but to no avail. I got a local friend to come tow me back to his house where I was staying. I was able to find a junkyard that had a wrecked 1100 and went and did a pick an pull which wasn’t as common in those days. I got the car back on the road and drove it back to Florida. I drove that car a few more years when a lady in a Cadillac decided to plow into me, totaling that car and leaving a scar on my forehead that lasted a few years until I saw a plastic surgeon to repair the hack job the E.R. doctor did. I had one an acquaintance call me up one day and asked me if I wanted to buy his Austin America, It had an oil pressure warning light that wouldn’t go out. I gave him $25 for it and drove it for another year when a coworker begged me to sell it to him. I got $200 for it and the warning light was still on when he bought it. By then MG was just about done in the USA and I moved on to owning Mercedes.
I had a post about this on pt.1 of this series but it’s more appropriate here:
Is the MG ZT (and the Rover 75 it was based on) the only car, ever, to be offered in both FWD and RWD versions? The top line model from both brands in the last years before MG/Rover went bust had a Ford 4.6L V8 from the Mustang driving the rear wheels. All other versions were front drive. I can’t think of any other car ever made that this was true of. Are there any?
A few that come close:
– the previous generation Ford Transit was available with RWD, AWD, or FWD. The latter took advantage of the absent driveshaft to lower the floor. But a van is not a car.
– arguably those funky Renault 5 and Clio high-performance models with fattened bodywork and reworked to accomodate a mid-engine RWD layout qualify, but almost the whole car was re-engineered to move the engine from its usual location under the hood and there are relatively few shared parts.
– the GM E platform of the ’60s and ’70s was used for the RWD Riviera and FWD Toronado and Eldorado. But none of the three offered both configurations on the same model.
– after the FWD 1930s Cord 810 and 812 went out of production, Graham briefly reused the body for one of their cars, with a redone shortened front section and RWD. I think there was a second manufacturer (Hupp?) who did the same.
But I can’t really think of any other car besides the Rover 75 / MG-ZT that essentially gave you a choice of FWD or RWD in the same car.
In the mid 80s there was both rwd and fwd Toyota Corollas offered at the same time. The rwd was an older platform keep around a couple years longer for the coupe.
And that Corolla coupe is the famous “AE86”.
There are two examples I can think of, both from the ’30s.
Adler Trumpf / Primus (1932-39) — the Trumpf’s the FWD one, but Adler had cold feet about the revolutionary technology and thought it best to have a sister model (same engines, body and chassis) with RWD, the Primus. Rosengart license-built both the Trumpf (as the Supertraction) and the Primus (as the 8 / 10 CV) in France.
Chenard-Walcker Super Aigle 4 / Aigle 4 (1934-36) and Aigle 24 / Aigle 22 (1936-37) — C-W launched their FWD as Citroen launched theirs. C-W’s effort was pretty terrible in comparison, and the firm quickly realised they could get more out of the new bodies if a RWD version with the same engine could be made. Did not prevent C-W from going under and being bought out by Chausson, who dropped the FWDs. C-W stopped making cars in 1940.
There was a Peugeot from Iran that was a 405 body with a 1960s Hillman chassis underneath (the “RD”, I think). It was either here or on The Truth About Cars that someone brought it up.
Another was the small ‘Ajax’ Triumph where the 1970 FWD 1500 (which later morphed into the RWD Dolomite) was sold alongside the RWD Triumph Toledo until 1973, both being developed from the original 1965 FWD Triumph 1300.
Yes that is a good one!
I managed a brief drive of an MG ZR once, which someone had on loan while the dealer was fixing their Rover 75…..
The “MG” bits of the ZR were very good really, the trouble was that the basic Rover 25 bits reminded me of an early Kia – that is to say it felt like it had the structural integrity of a biscuit tin.
The red MG Metro with Washington state plates–I ran into the owner a few times at a laundromat in Seattle a few years ago. He said it’s one of three in the United States. He got a vanity plate with a number matching the original British plate.
CC Effect strikes again: I was just reading an ad in today’s newspaper (yes we still have em) : in Wellington New Zealand today I could buy a new MG 3 for $NZ16,995 on special. That’s cheap and it’s a nice looking little car IMO but few takers even at that price. Dealer website link below with lots of specs n pics if anyone interested.
Link was to gazley.com/mg
Back in the early ’70s, a ’64 MG 1100 almost became my first car. My Dad and I saw it, parked in the postage-stamp sized front yard of an Alexandria townhouse, with a for-sale sign asking $275. It was exactly the same color as the one posted here. One unusual thing I remember is it had a hang-on AC unit installed. We stopped to look at it several times and tried to contact the seller. Meanwhile, I found some old ’60s MG ads in my parent’s National Geographic collection, and began dreaming about having my very own ‘MG Sports sedan’. We never did get hold of the seller, and the MG disappeared after a few weeks.
Maybe that was a good thing, as I don’t think my budding mechanical skills could have coped with the hydrolastic suspension or transaxle-in-the-crankcase drivetrain!
Happy Motorung, Mark
Speaking of rear windows.
My older brother bought a new 1983 Chev. Malibu wagon without AC
He did not realize that the rear windows did not roll up or down till days later when his kids rode in back.
They were sealed in place.. another GM cost saver.
MG sales have grown, though largely on the back of their SUVs, with Electric and Hybrid options available. They even manged a couple of top ten monthly sales in the past 12 months: the ZS last November (6th place) and the bigger HS in June this year (9th place).
A surprise in 2020 was the introduction of an Estate/Wagon, the MG5 EV, which in the UK is Electric only.
https://www.autoexpress.co.uk/mg/mg5
I think you’ll need a Part 3 in a year. Suddenly becoming a credible car company again with its EVs.
Im seeing a lot of MG badged cars on the roads SUVs, EVs & cars they must be getting sales, they arent the MGs of old but nothing else is the old cars either, they got better or just evaporated.
They are now in the top 10 of Australia’s leading selling brands.