(first posted 8/7/2012) Unless you’re over a certain age, or have a kink for Midgets, or are not from the US, say the word “MG” and this is the car that undoubtedly comes to mind first. It is the MG, a timelessly-handsome and sports car that arrived in 1962, and was built for almost twenty years in an effort to keep the brand’s flame alive. Of course that was a losing battle, and in the US, where the bulk of all MG sports cars had been sold since the war, this was the end of the road for MG. For ten years, there was a hole in the market until the Mazda Miata so brilliantly picked up where B left off. What is their secret?
Functionally, the Miata is a much better MGB, even though it likes to think its styling was inspired by the Lotus Elan. That’s not taking anything away from the Miata (or the Elan), but reality is that the hole left by the popular B was its target, and in its dimensions, the Miata is within two inches in every direction, except width, where modern design necessitated a bit more (6″) girth.
Maybe taking its design cues from the Elan wasn’t the right choice; I’m putting on my Nomex suit before I say it, but the MGB is a better-looking car than the Miata. Obviously, comparing two cars designed thirty years apart has intrinsic limitations, but I’ve never been a fan of the Miata’s windshield, which looks too much like a coupe that had its roof cut off. And although they’re the same height, the B looks much more planted to the ground, and appears to be wider, despite the reality. Its stance and proportions are just better.
I’ll up the ante: I think the B is one of the very best designs of the post war era, and not just in the world of sports cars. I loved it when I first saw it in 1962, and I’ve never fallen out of love. I can’t think of a more perfect, clean, balanced, timeless design for a popular-priced sports car. There’s not a bad line or detail on it. Yes, some of the Italian Spyders may have been more “beautiful” and seductive, but they always showed their age more readily. The B is so clean, and its seductive curves on the tops of the front fender and doors just invite a touch.
AUWM has a more detailed account of how the B’s design came to be, by in-house designer Don Hayter. This was during the period when Pininfarina had a contract to redesign BMC’s passenger car line. There is some disagreement to the extent Pininfarina “massaged” the B’s design; not surprisingly, Hayter claims that there was very little change. We may never know, but what is all-too obvious is the similarity to Pininfarina’s very influential other cars that preceded the B, like the 1959 Fiat 1500 Roadster (above).
Pininfarina’s then-current Roadster/Cabriolet design language showed up in a number of cars, from Ferraris to the Peugeot 404 (above). It doesn’t really matter, but there’s no way to deny that Pininfarina’s influence is very apparent in the MGB, directly or indirectly. And perhaps ironically, it’s the best of the bunch, in my book.
There’s no disputing the fact that Pininfarina did design the MGB-GT’s roofline and rear hatch, which shows its similarities to others he was doing at the time, including the Austin A40.
Speaking of the MGB-GT, I already documented my own less-than fulfilling ownership experience with one. So, I’ll stick to the roadster here, and try not to have it be colored too much by my own B-in. There’s no doubt that vintage British cars have their foibles, but I wouldn’t hesitate to have a B roadster in my fantasy garage for a moment. The GT: why bother, without the top-down experience? Unless it’s your daily driver perhaps, like this green one. No way.
It’s a summer-time toy, like this one owned by its enthusiastic female owner. As a matter of fact, the green GT is owned by a woman too. Hmm. This is a 1967, the last year for the Mk I series. And perhaps the most desirable; certainly in terms of the lack of smog controls. Of course, that’s essentially irrelevant now.
But the ’67 was also the last year for the original dash, before safety regs required a pillowy one that looked decidedly less clean. It was also the last year before the transmission was changed to a fully-synchronized (on first) unit, so the ’68 and up have it in that regard. Too bad the best of both didn’t overlap. But then having to shift down to first on the go was not a common occurrence with the B’s torquey 1798cc B-series engine.
It was essentially the same basic engine that the A had used, with a larger bore. In 1965, the block was upgraded to five bearings. Power was 95 hp at 5400 rpm, and a healthy 110 ft.lb. of torque. BMC had toyed with the idea of a new narrow angle OHC V4, as well as the twin-cam MGA engine for the B, but like so many other aspects of the ADO23 project, BMC’s ambitions had to be reined in, given the realities of the market and the B’s expected lifespan (seven years).
During my brother’s MGA days, he had a friend with a warmed-over white B with a racing stripe: higher compression, head work, hotter cam, header, Pirelli radials on Minilites, and an Abarth exhaust. The ride he gave me in order to impress me with his efforts was very convincing indeed. I can still hear that engine screaming its guts out at maybe 6500 rpm; Whoa! This was a whole new MG experience altogether from the tired A my brother puttered in.
Dreams of independent rear suspension, and even a coil-spring four-link solid rear ended up giving way to a traditional leaf-sprung rear axle. The only major change from the MGA was a unibody, which was stiffer and allowed a modicum of improvement in suspension softness and effectiveness. Following an A down the road is painful just to to watch: every little bump makes the body quiver. The B is a bit less so, but still delivered that classic unvarnished English sports car feel. Fortunately, that’s what a lot of buyers were looking for, or at least ended up with. Over a half-million B’s were built (including the GT), which I suspect only the Miata has topped, and it by a 100% margin.
At least in this CC, we’re not going to go down the painful road the MGB was forced to take due to emission controls and safety and bumper regs. We all know what a pathetic thing it turned into, jacked up to meet the bumper height standard, and sporting all of 70 hp. Maybe another time; today let’s remember how it was in its prime: handsome, reasonably athletic, and a winning personality. Not the most sophisticated or exotic sports car out there, but one that delivered the expected and desired experience its owners were looking for; fifty years ago, and today.
Ah. My earliest touch of auto enthusiasm began here. My parents had an MG B convertible when they got married. I came along, and the grandparents urged them to trade it in on the Impala. My mother loves me, but she’s still not over that trade in. In fact, she wouldn’t own another Chevy after that bad trade for another 30+ years. BUT, she did own another MG. When my little sister graduated from infant to toddler, our VW Type IV graduated to an MG C hatch.
Unfortunately, that car and an irresponsible valet on the San Antonio River Walk didn’t mix well, and soon I was being driven to 2nd grade in a ’76 Firebird Formula. The Firebird was an awesome car, but it’s the MG C and B that still come up regularly in our nostalgic moments.
Now THAT’S one beautiful car! I agree: the MGB epitomizes the sports-car style, while the MX5 is merely an imitator.
Unfortunately, the reality is that the MX5 is 10,000+ times better than the British could ever imagine, but at the price of character – in style and, say, “patina”? I’m still learning how to use that word!
Our 2007 MX5 was a great little car, but we don’t miss it except for the drop-top. The problem is, an MX5 is absolutely trouble-free – it starts up every time, runs perfectly and won’t go up in smoke on you. That said, would I have another? Only if were a Grand Touring, retractable hardtop model with cruise control – sciatic/hamstring issues do that to you…which is the main reason we sold ours. However – if I REALLY want a ride in one, all I have to do is cross our street and visit the one we just sold to our neighbor…
An old friend had a caramel/mustard-yellow 1974 MGB and it was a great little car until it literally went up in smoke one day. Sad…
An MX5 is a great car, but it’s missing…something…
Agreed – it IS a beautiful design. When I think “sports car” – meaning the original, born of postwar affluence – it’s the MGB I think of.
Small, seemingly light and lithe; close to the ground. A two-seater. Little, low windshield. Clean design all around; so different from the 1960s Detroit iron.
As I learned, later, of the issues behind all the clean design…I came to the conclusion that you HAD to be an enthusiast to own one; because only an enthusiast would put up with its problems.
Two generations later (well, almost) in comes Mazda with a modern car in something of the same format. Only this time it comes reliable and dependable and durable…the Japanese Miracle rolling.
Only…it loses a bit in translation, as noted. Oh, but that Mazda had chosen to copy, in the way of Japan’s Inspired Imitation, the MGB’s styling.
Or that someone come out with a kit car. Or a rebuild kit for rotted, worn-out MGs – a rebuild kit that included fittings to put Japanese engines, drivelines and wiring and suspensions in.
Japan already did an MGB, the Datsun Sports 1600 (CC here).
True, insofar as intent. In translation, something was lacking.
As was often the case in the early years, the Asians didn’t understand what made a “clean design” work, or what it was. So often their cars came out looking like melted plastic models, or kit-bashed ones.
As an aside, it’s probably what’s made the marriage of Nissan and Renault WORK. Both companies had tremendous strengths; both had fearful deficiencies. And the strength of each covered for the other.
French design, Japanese engineering and quality control…viola!
I think the problem with the Datsun was it was too short, making it look like it belongs in Toontown. My friend described it as “gay,” or maybe “kawaii” (cute) is a better way to put it. Otherwise it was technically miles ahead of the ‘B, in addition to Japanese QC.
I heard MG tested every car they built, using local roads.
The Datsun 1600 engine looked a lot like the B’s But the windshield looked too tall and out of proportion. The 1600’s looked ‘Top Heavy” I think it was the design of the windshield.I don’t know, could be just me.
Hmmmm. Now there’s a question – the most beautiful postwar design. I have never actually thought about this, but as I look at the MGB again, it has got to be in the running.
I once stupidly turned down a chance to drive one of these. A fellow I worked for had one that was sort of a never-finished project and he would drive it to work every once in awhile. I needed to run something to one of his clients and he offered me the keys to the MG, saying “it needs to be driven”.
I don’t remember now why I turned it down. It may have been too hot out, it may have been in my smoking days and I didn’t want to smoke in his car, or maybe I had a car that I was newly in love with. No idea. I wish now that I had taken the keys and given it a spin.
So, have you found us an MGC or one of the 1990s MGs with the Rover V8 for tomorrow?
An article on the MG-V8 would be neat. Beware of what you ask for regarding the MGC. That’s a history you want to read only if you’re into pain, suffering, and incompetence. And an early milestone in the British Leyland death watch.
Ate Up With Motor covered the sad story of the MGC in his always thorough and expert fashion.
There is definitely a rightness to the B’s design. I think it gets forgotten as one of the best designs since it is so common. Plus it was buggered with near the end.
Those hideous giant black plastic bumpers were awful. And the electronics. And the build quality. Given my current reality and mechanical ability, I’d rather have the MX-5.
i saw this one yesterday. all me crazy but i think the rubber bumpers were a good solution to the problem of the 5 mph bumper rules. i think it modernized a classic design that was beginning to feel retro in the ’70s.
hey, that photo wasn’t upside down when i uploaded it!
I don’t mind the rubber bumpers either. Certainly better than what the Midget got. The biggest issue is they jacked the ride height at the same time which messed with the looks. Some folks have made the rubber bumpers body coloured which can look good.
Interesting photo. The hood on that one is from an MGC (the short lived six cylinder version). MGC’s never had rubber bumpers, so I wonder what’s under the hood?
I’m glad someone’s ok with them. I admit that trying to keep a 1962 design going for so long created challenges, and I wasn’t any too fond of the seventies’ updates either. I’m not sure what the best solution would have been, but I just can’t quite get used to them, even after all these decades.
try again…
Yup, I’m a rubber bumper fan.
Ah, my first car. My recollection and Wikipedia say the 5 main bearing engine came out in mid-65, but the older engine had a fair amount of grunt. Lots of fun to drive, reliable* enough to be a college student’s car, and easy to work on.
* reliable being a relative term, for one willing to keep tools and parts in the trunk.
I remember seeing lots of Bs with a crack in the driver’s door at the back end of the vent window. (crack, then rusted. Mine was about 3 inches long). I figured out it’s from drivers using the windshield to brace themselves getting in or out of the car. I was careful with my TR3A and kept my paws off of it…
Tuneups were fairly easy–SUs can be balanced, at least until the throttle bushings wear out. I liked being able to use motor oil in the trans, though the 30 weight made for interesting shifts on a cold winter’s morning.
I’ll never buy an MG again (I’m too old, too many other projects), but I still have a soft spot for the beast. BTW, you could fit 5 people in the cars, if they are close friends and all are crazy.
Did my fingers type 1964? Fixed.
My ’67 B had that crack; I assume it was due to unequal stress in line with the vent window. Mine also had the high-compression engine rated at 98hp; anyone else have this?
It seemed less noisy with the top down, maybe that was an acoustic illusion.
Mine was a 64 and I have documented my pain already. However, I would probably still have it if it hadn’t been rear ended. Had no intention of ridding myself of it once it became reliable. It wasn’t my favorite MGB however. That honor goes to one I did not own.
I don’t know the year but the bulletproof MGB engine had been replaced by a 283 and an american 4 speed of some kind. Only clue was the hood scoop. Key was that the electrics were replaced also. I used to see that car at the dragstrip in El Paso.
There is just something about a car you can drive to the races, kick butt, and drive home again.
There is no disputing that the early B is a timeless beauty. It is easy to see how so many were seduced by it’s charms and were so willing to overlook it’s short comings.
A cute car. Sat in one once in the 1970’s. No legroom, I could barely get in it. I recall a guy buying one new in 1980. Do I remember correctly that it cost about $ 8,000? A friend said that the proud owner needed cast iron kidneys to drive it.
Never looked at a Miata. Are they any roomier? The smallest car I ever drove was a Karmann Ghia. A neat little car, but a little claustrophobic. At least there was enough room for me to drive it.
The early Bs had tons of leg room. I’m 6’2 and had plenty. I sat in an early 70s B at an auto show and the room was gone. I guess they moved the seats forward. If I recall correctly, later Bs had a vestigal pad for a back seat. Mine had carpet covering the battery boxes and carpet for the back.
My B had a stiff suspension. Ground clearance was 5 inches (lots of fun when we got a 12″ blizzard one winter), so not a lot of travel.
Yes, the MGB was the only car I had to pull up the seat to reach the pedals even though I’m 6’0″ tall. Much more space inside than the Midget.
I dunno; the Fiat 124 Spider was in production for a year longer than the MGB (1966-1985) and is, in my opinion, a much prettier design. The MGB always looked slab-sided and dated to me.
I was wondering who would be the first to bust me on that. And there was the Alfa Duetto/Spyder too.
I owned over the years: a Fiat 124 Spider, 2 Alfa Spiders, a Jensen Healey and a MGB. I missed the 124 the most overall, it was ’72 model with 1608 engine, an eager short stroker and that top was an one hand operation. Liked the Alfa’s dashboard. The MGB was a fine looking agricultural tractor.
I suppose it’s heresy to include the VW KG.
“..the B is one of the very best designs of the post war era”, definitely.
“..the MGB is a better-looking car than the Miata”, not from this 21st century point of view. Lotus Elan was ahead of its time, and late-20th century styling caught up with its curves. By the early nineties the first Miata was both contemporary and retro.
I agree the Miata’s windshield looks a little awkward with the top down, but it’s styled to go with its removable hardtop, which it does perfectly, as you see on mine. I’ll argue the Miata hardtop is one of the prettiest coupes ever built.
Miata’s windshield frame is thicker than the MG’s, I assume (and hope) to make it stand up to a rollover.
My local barista owns both these cars, a red MGB and a green GT. I got some nice photos when we both had our red roadsters on the same day.
IMHO, the weakest part of the NA and NB Miatas are their front ends, which reflected the anonymous aero-look that was so in style during its development. Looks too much like an Olds Alero or such up there, and just not enough interest and character. The NC rectifies that to a considerable extent, without losing the continuity of the design.
Would this help? 😉
Looks like Lightning McQueen’s evil cousin! 🙂
The front end of Miata, especially 1st gen were just a bit too round, a bit too cute, therefore a bit too chick friendly, and oh too hair dresser friendly. All good news for new car sales. But few auto enthusiasts or collectors are chicks or hair dressers. So Miatas are not collector friendly.
Paul, just an outstanding design commentary! The MGB is one of those automotive styling icons that are simply timeless. It will never go out of fashion as time goes on.
I will take MGA over B.
“Hmmmm. Now there’s a question – the most beautiful postwar design. I have never actually thought about this, but as I look at the MGB again, it has got to be in the running.”
J.P.C. You are feverish. Step away from the keyboard, apply Austin Healey, MGA, XK120 and a cioppino of Alfas and Ferraris with a Miura on top.
Sorry, but the MGB is just ok to look at. No disrespect to its fans, but if I want a demanding oldie, give me a TR6 or a Giulietta or a chauffeur-driven Fleetwood d’Carmine.
I came across an old posting on a Miata forum I thought it relevant to share. In it, Bob Hall — the auto journalist turned Mazda employee who was one of those responsible for the Miata’s development — relates that the car was definitely envisioned as “an MGB that would start on a rainy day.” The Elan wasn’t particularly on Mazda’s radar, though as Hall further relates, he later managed to convince Mazda to buy one simply because he wanted to drive it.
Hall also wrote that the Miata’s front end was originally styled to look more Ferarriesque, but had to be modified due to bumper regulations.
http://forum.miata.net/vb/showpost.php?p=1188829
Thanks; that fills in some nice details, including the Ferarri Spyder nose. Makes sense.
Excellent history, thanks!
I’ve owned both (91 MX-5 and 70 B) and while there’s no denying the vast difference in reliability quotient, I felt the B was better looking and, dare I say it, more fun behind the wheel (both were bone stock). I preferred the steering in particular. On bumpy roads it seemed the B’s unibody had less scuttle shake too. I did finally break down and swap wire wheels for alloys because keeping the wires true was a pain in the butt.
Ever since seeing it first, in light blue, on the cover of Road&Track in 1962, I too have thought it to be one of the most perfectly beautiful cars ever made.
I wish my ’67 was that color; beautiful! I had the high-compression engine, which if I recall, was rated 98hp. It also had amber turn signals. Worst thing about it was keeping the four battery contacts clean, & changing that wretched cartridge oil filter with the take-off for the oil cooler. There is little room to get a wrench securely on the end of the filter bolt. First oil change took me all day. My friend’s brother had a TR-6, which had similar difficulties in that vein.
Other character-building adventures for a young British car owner: The driver’s window exploded once, luckily while retracted. There was a tear in the door sheet-metal underneath the vent-window, which I think is a design flaw. Once I accidentally drove over a parking abutment & broke a rear leaf-spring. I never imagined that was possible in any vehicle. Once the speedo stopped working, but I was able to take it out of the dash & disassemble it easily. There was a loose screw.
But that car was a blast to drive up San Gabriel Canyon Rd. with the top down, & its styling aged well.
I have drivin both. 91 Mitia (my brothers) and my MGB 1964 roadster. Aside from the ribbing about reliability I preffer the B. WHY? Well its roomy and when you shift it it has some meat in the gearbox. Its got more muscle than a Miata. Not all Bs drive the same. And someone once told me
” it’s not possible to own just one” thats the key to The reliability issue have at least two. But in the world of no talent instant gratification the Miata is fine.. But real men drive MGs. And real sport car enthusiasts fix there own cars. When I get too old to shift I might get an automatic Miata. But for now I prefer my 64B and My 74.5 BGT. I sold my 72B this last spring. It Handled great . I like the webbers on the later cars but the hs4 is the best carb for the B . Dges outlaw a good second choice.
I could have shot one earlier today that shows up occasionally in the parking lot at work. Love it.
I’d love to get a MGB GT with the V8 engine but genuine ones are getting rare. I’m not so keen on the open cars never really have been but the hatch with the Rover engine I’d happily pedal anytime.
I’ve gone through times when I[ve an MGB with MX5 running gear would be just about perfect. Some swear by the GM V6/5-speed, but I think that might make the car nose-heavy.
The 1st generation Miata CAN look a bit plain, so I understand when someone says that an MGB and/or a BGT is a better looking car. However, some years of the MG are less attractive than others.
The same goes for the interior of the MGB, some years look better than others.
And then there’s the engine, some years….
This must have been originally posted before I started reading Curbside Classic. I have never owned an MGB but several friends did back in the day and I have considerable seat time, both as a passenger and as a driver. On a warm, sunny day, when everything is working correctly, these can be among the most charming cars on the road. However, it seems that the working perfectly days were always outnumbered by the not so great days, by a factor of four or five. A family friend had a part-time business buying, fixing and selling old English sports cars, this was more of a hobby than any type of money-making scheme. Back in the late eighties he tried to convince us to buy one of his newly freshened MGB’s. My wife and I drove it around on a summer’s weekend and found it enjoyable, if somewhat slow in absolute terms. We might have considered purchasing the car except neither she nor I really wanted it as a daily driver. The tipping point was when it just died at a traffic light and refused to restart; at least the small size makes them easier to push. I’m sure the flaw was nothing serious, just typical Lucas Electrics gremlins. The MGB remains on my Powerball list, for those two or three sunny Sundays in the spring when going nowhere slowly seems appealing.
The conventional wisdom holds that cars like the MGB were not very reliable, especially when it came to electrics. I ran a rubber bumper MGB for about 15 years as a daily driver. The car had 90,000 miles on it when I bought it and finally had to be retired with 205,000 when the rust got a bit too much. In that time the only significant component from front to back that was replaced or repaired was the clutch when the release bearing failed. Granted the overdrive had stopped working some years before the end, and the compression on number 3 cylinder was pretty low, but only once did the car fail to get home under its own power (the release bearing failure).
In 1991 I took the car on a trip around the country, driving it in all 48 contiguous states and covering well over 10,000 miles in 6 weeks. In 115F weather on I-5 or crossing the continental divide a couple of times the car ran fine.
Electrical issues? There were a couple of times the fuses needed to be cleaned but that was about it. The electric fans could be a bit temperamental on occasion because the location of the temperature sensor in the top radiator tank wasn’t very clever, the top hose ran right next to it and could nudge the connectors as the engine moved a bit under torque.
I think a lot of reliability issues stem from the cars not being driven enough, they really don’t like sitting for long.
I remember reading in the UK Classic car mags that you could build an entire MGB from scratch just from the repro spares industry back then (about 20 years ago). The MG isn’t my cup of lukewarm beer, but it’s pretty basic and I’ve known people to use them as DDs. The DDs I’ve seen more recently have been the GTs.
One of the presenters on old Top Gear had one built in response to the RV8 and reckoned it was better and cheaper. I’d think you could build one today, might not be able to get every little piece brand new though.
The same goes for the Mini and maybe others.
Very nice write-up and photos. Interesting comments too. I missed this the first time around.
I’ve owned several British cars, all great fun, two of them MG’s, but never a B. In fact, my first car was a ’70 MG Midget, British Racing Green trimmed in Iowa rust. A great way to learn a lot about cars and driving. The Midget felt like you were going 60 when it was really only maybe 30, and with everything around you larger, you learned to be very careful in traffic with it. I had my Midget about a year and a half, and if it had been the larger MGB I would have kept it. The Midget was just too small for my college years.
The MGB has always been on my list though, even now, should I ever decide to trade my MG TD for something at least a little more modern. I agree, the B is one of the best post-war designs.
I see a green MGB GT, British racing green with wire wheels driving through traffic at 6:30-7am in my town. The gentleman driving it is wearing a suit and usually a fedora type hat. I love it when I decide to drive my ’63 VW Bus to work and I’m sitting at the light as he
goes past. It’s like a small slip back to the 1960’s.
Jacked up MGBs are much better in the snow
Nice .
I’m not really a ragtop / roadster kinda guy so I bought a ’67 MGB GT and rebuilt it end to end as I daily drove it plus road rallies , it was fun and plenty roomy , (I’m 6′ and have 32″ inseam) , with the over drive it easily gets up and boogies .
I was able to drive it faster than it wanted to remain on twisty roads so after a few very happy years I sold it , the new owner loves it to death .
Little British Cars are a thing you either ‘ ken ‘ or don’t , no middle ground .
I’m getting ready to overhaul a 1963 MGB 1800 engine I chanced across and stick it in my Metropolitan Nash FHC with it’s massaged MGA 1622 cylinder head , Weber carby etc….
The fun never ends when you drive an old British car =8-) .
-Nate
As far as MGB’s styling goes, it did have wonderful proportion. I wonder if it was due to the fact that it didn’t have to share chassis with a four door sedan. See attached photo. MGB had minimum front overhang, and just the “right” rear overhang. Giving B that sports feel. Both Italian spiders were comprised with too long front overhang and dis-proportioned rear overhang.
MGB’s wheelbase were 91″ with 153″ length; Alfa Spider? 88.6″ wheelbase with 167.3″ length. Interestingly, the latest Miata’s wheelbase is 91.1″ with 154.1″ length, almost identical to the chrome bumper MGB.
Besides, MGB’s engine were “almost” behind the front axle, couple more inches it would be a front mid-engine design. Alfa’s engine were right on top of the front axle. In fact, if one were to swap in a V6 to replace that B-series, it would become a front mid-engine layout.
A better pic
It might look great on the outside, but the picture below of the front suspension is why I never took MGB’s seriously. See any ball joints there? And the upper control arms are essentially lever-action shocks? In 1962?
How could you spend all that money on a new unibody and carry over a 1930’s “Knee-Action” suspension system? Sure, ’62 Corvettes had kingpins too, but that was the last year of a chassis that was essentially a shortened version of the ’53 sedan.
There are “conversion” kits available, but once converted, the driving experience won’t be the same.
http://www.classicconversionseng.com/Coil-Over-Front-Suspension.htm
Even IRS: http://www.hoyle-suspension.co.uk/html/rearsuspsuspension.html
The tube shock conversions are the way to go, there are several types, handling is superior, at least in autocross. I’ve had 12 MGB “tourers”, the correct word for the roadster, and 3 GTs, all ’66 to ’74. I wouldn’t own a rubber bumper version, which came along in ’74 1/2.
IMO they are more fun to drive for the bucks than any other car you can name, you can drive one at 10 -10ths and feel like Fangio all the while. No, they are not that fast, but do feel much faster than they are.
The body is very stiff, one of the strongest of the era and still pretty competitive today, amazing for an almost 60 year design. Corrosion is a bugaboo and on the iceberg principle, if you can see any rust on the rockers it’s far worse where you don’t see it.
The engine and trans are very robust and long lasting, and one of the nicest shifting anywhere. Though cylinders are siamesed in the iron block they are not overheating prone. Their main foible are oil leaks and Lucas electrics, but if you clean contacts and use dielectric grease you can eliminate much of it.
We’ve had several Jags, quite a few TRs, and 3 or 4 Spitfires, but the MGB is as fun to drive as any of them and a flat out bargain; they made 500 thousand of them and prices are still very reasonable, and parts super easy to get, you can even get a complete body shell and create a new one! If I were to have another it would definitely be a GT, the Brits call it the “poor man’s Aston”. It’s a beautiful balanced design, and the higher windscreen and headroom is a plus for us tall guys, not to mention an even stiffer body. Everyone should own an MGB!
Having owned an MGB and a NA Miata I’d take the Mazda every time.
You can get an MGB to be reliable, its not difficult, modern fuel pump and electronic ignition will do it, and you have to enjoy regular maintenance. It’ll still be slow but will give you a pleasant old-skool driving experience.
The Mazda is cute as a button, especially the early ones with a Nardi wheel. Delightful pop-up lights and terrific handling and compared to the MG they have minimal rust issues. Remove the rose-tinted specs and its no contest.
I drove my ’67 MGB through the US and Germany for over four years. As a young GI with a family, the only mechanic I could afford was me. Learning to balance side-draft SUs was an adventure. I had to sell in ’77, but planned to get a new one after college. Then an air pump appeared under the bonnet, the SUs gave way to a Zenith “pot”, an ugly black rubber piece replaced the chrome front bumper, steel disc wheels replaced the lovely 60-spoke wire wheels, and the whole thing was raised on the suspension several inches. A friend got a ’74, and I realized “my” MGB was gone forever.
Then around 1999 I fell in love — a Japanese company called Mazda had designed a convertible sports car that seemed to be the reincarnation of my beloved MGB. Now in 2024, I’m on my second Miata–a PRHT (Power Retractable Hard Top) NC. A few suspension alterations and its a bit stiff, but sits flat through the curves. Unlike my MGB, I rarely need to raise the bonnet. It has a single negatively ground battery and no damnable Lucas electrics to swear at.