Seen recently in the parking lot at work were this 1975-80 MGB and 1998-2002 Camaro staring each other down.
*The MGB debuted in 1962, and in 1975 (US market), weighed around 2,300 lb., and was powered by a 1.8l four-cylinder 62 HP petrol engine with four-speed transmission (five-speed overdrive available) and rear-wheel drive. Theoretical top speed was around 90 MPH, and it got around 22 MPG. The front bumper with inset badge would seem to indicate this is a 1975 or later car.
The fourth-gen Camaro debuted in 1993, weighed around 3,500 lb., and in base convertible trim, was powered by a 3.8l V6 making 200 HP with a five-speed manual and rear-wheel drive. Top speed was a governed 112 MPH and it got an EPA-reported 17/28 MPG. The grille pegs this one as a 1998 or later car.
So which one would you choose to drive to work, and why?
Related Reading:
1997 Chevrolet Camaro – Conspicuously Purple (Tom Klockau)
Storage Yard Classic: Rubber-Bumper MG-B Roadster (David Saunders)
*feel free to offer clarifications to these specs in the comments – I wasn’t about to try to guess the exact model year of either car!
Having pined after a small British roadster in high school I would pick the MG. The small windy roads on the island I live on would also benefit the MG. I think parts would be easier to find for the camaro but I bet the MG would be easier to work on. But since it rains a lot in British Columbia I think a removable hardtop would be in order and a working heater for defrosting the windows.
I’m with you, Julio. Plenty of narrow windy roads around here, and hills where the Camaro’s massive front overhang would get hung up. Like the Mustang II, this car really needs the front wheels pushed forward about four inches.
Not so much rain here, so I could do without the hardtop.
The MG is probably easier to get parts for. You might need to order from a catalog but practically anything is available including a whole new shell.
Fourth generation Camaros did not gain the 3.8 V6 until the 1996 model year; prior to that, a 160 hp 3.4 V6 was standard. A friend’s mom had one of these early base t-top cars with an automatic, and that car was all show, no go…
I haven’t driven either one of these cars but have been a passenger in an MGB (I think, it would have been a while ago) and have driven and ridden in the 2nd generation Camaro. With those “experiences” to draw on, I think I would pick the MGB. However, living in Florida I’d want A/C so that would make the Camaro more attractive.
Just a few days ago I saw a Camaro similar to this one, but with a black top and the RS package with it’s ground effects package….I prefer these Camaros WITHOUT ground effects.
If the choice is the ‘only’ car for driving not only to work, but everywhere, the clear choice would be the Camaro. Even an old, 4th gen Camaro is going to be lightyears ahead of any British car in terms of reliability.
OTOH, if someone has another, more stable vehicle as a back-up (as well as not minding regularly turning a wrench and hunting for parts), I might take the MGB for those nice days. It’s definitely much more of a fair-weather vehicle than the Chevy.
For fun? the MG. To insure I get there, the Camaro
I love me some old British cars but a rubber bumper MG ? (B or Midget) NO WAY .
.
A true rolling turd, one must suffer it to fully comprehend .
.
I know nothing about the modern Chevy but even a Chevette would beat this MG Roadster .
.
-Nate
Well if I had to choose one to drive to work I’d go with the Camaro because it can cruise easily at 70 mph on my 23 mile commute.
If I were choosing one to own it would be the MGB because it’s an iconic classic and likely to appreciate in value were as the Camaro is still heading south.
Also I’ll bet the MGB windshield and cowl don’t shake and squeak when entering a driveway hump. Also the MGB does not have a fiberglass door for the window regulator rivets to tear through at their attachment points. Also over half of the MGBs engine is not under the cowl. Also…..
I’d love the MGB as a toy (not serious daily transportation), and for the rubber bumper models I’d put the pre-bumper springs and shocks on it to get the height back down to normal.
As a real use car, however, the Camaro takes it any day. I’d insist on the five speed to be willing to consider it (don’t care which engine), and I’d enjoy the convertible. However, were we talking a T-top coupe, there would be footprints up my back from my wife running me down to get to the car first. A T-top Camaro (Firebird is an acceptable substitute) of any generation (third preferred, however) is her ultimate dream toy.
I agree with Syke, the rubber bumpered MGBs were raised to meet US standards and that un-designed-for height threw the whole car off its game.
Give me a normal height chrome bumbered MGB, any MGA, any bug eye sprite or Midget and, if I fit in it, I’d drive it,
For fun.
But for work? Where you gotta be there rain, shine, or snow, 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year. No way. Not if I want to keep my job.
I’d take the Camaro IF it had the five-speed. At least we could have fun rowing through the gears. If it’s a slush box, I would consider the MG if it were a 75 model. That means no smog check in sunny SoCal. Make the engine breathe and the little roadster could be okay!
” If it’s a slush box, I would consider the MG if it were a 75 model. That means no smog check in sunny SoCal. Make the engine breathe and the little roadster could be okay!”
.
RE : proper engine breathing : in 1974 BMC went from a Duplex timing chain and gears to a single row one that doesn’t last long before stretching and retarding both cam and ignition timing .
.
At the same time , they moved the woodruff key 4° retarded to lower N02 emissions , that’s the real pinch point in later MGB engines as far as power ~ it’s a simple thing to replace the cam chain and both sprockets along with the hydraulic tensioner as they’re guaranteed to be worn out by 50,000 miles , the increase in tractable power and driving pleasure will amaze you .
.
The early model Duplex chain and sprockets are cheaper and fit without any modifications .
.
The weird and much maligned single Zenith-Stromberg CV carby isn’t really terrible unless you touch it as it’s tricky to set up properly , needing a cheap special tool .
.
-Nate
I’d take the MG at least I could get parts if it broke down oddball Chevrolets with no dealers or reliable parts support could be a problem here.
Because I make poor choices, I’d choose the MG for all uses. It looks as though it’s been lowered back to stock, and the rubber bumper designs don’t bother me; they prevent dinged chrome bumpers. The first thing I’d do, if it hasn’t alreayd been done, it swap it to dual SUs. I’m not a fan of that generation of Camaro; the styling does nothing for me, and the quality, particularly in the interior, is just barely passible. At least in the MG, I get British charm to go with my bad quality, not the interior of a Chevy Cavalier.
Fourth-gen Camaro — are we at the point where every single original part has fallen off and was reattached by an attentive owner? Probably so… But at least with the MGB you could say yes for sure, the few survivors have been babied for decades now.
I prefer the pre-facelift styling, but I’d take the Camaro, in good condition. The fate of the MGB is a known-quantity. But once all the shitbox 4th gens are off the road, good Camaros will be well-respected.
If I didn’t need AC and we were talking about a chrome-bumpered B (the correct ride height), I would take the MGB. It would have to have the 5th gear overdrive which does make cruising at 70 much more pleasant. I did have a 1970 that I used as a daily driver and once I got it ‘sorted’ it was quite reliable. I ditched the old fuel pump for one of those solid state ones and repaired sketchy previous owner wiring wherever found. Wish I never sold it…
MG all day long, so long as we are talking fair weather car that only comes out to play occasionally. What is wrong with a rubber bumper MG can be fixed. What’s wrong with one of these Camaros, well . . . .
I owned a ’95 Z28 convertible (my second and last new car). I drove it for 208,000 miles. I replaced the radiator, A/C condenser, various small parts, did regular maintenance (all fluids every 50k miles, 7,500 Mobil 1 changes, etc.). It got 24 mpg on the road, was very quick, comfortable and one of the best cars I’ve owned. It ALWAYS started, ALWAYS ran, ALWAYS got me there…and was fun! No question the interior could have been better, but it held up for 20 years, the top was fully lined and never gave a problem, it was weather tight and pretty quiet at high speeds.
So, I guess I’d take the Camaro.
When it comes to European vehicles only Saabs stir my soul so I would rather have the Camaro. They can take a good beating like 3rd gens can right?
A V6 4th-gen Camaro does nothing for me. As a ragtop, the situation improves ever so slightly. But I really just don’t care for them. A friend had a ’94 Firebird and, while he liked it, I thought it was a rather dreadful car. It did make it to almost 200K miles though before he traded it on an Infiniti I30 in 2004. Regardless, if I had to drive it every day to work (~30 highway miles each way) I’d take the Camaro of the two.
If I could drive something, anything, else to work it’d be the MGB all the way. It doesn’t seem to be as “stilty” as the usual B so someone may have already done the work of restoring the correct ride height, and it looks well-kept otherwise. Even with the measly 62 HP rating of the stock smogged engine, it would fit into the “driving a slow car fast” category. And it’s still charming, just less so than a chrome-bumper one.