I’d no idea what kind of an MG this was, except it was tiny. Standing next to it felt as though it came only up to my knees, and I could touch the front and rear bumper at the same time if I were to stretch.
Except there is no front or rear bumper; they’ve been removed. Perhaps the owner felt they made the car just too doggone long…?
I don’t know what year this car might be, only that it was made after 31 December 1968. How? Because of the triple wipers:
Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard № 104 took effect on 1 January 1968. It required more than 90 per cent of the windshield area be swept by the wipers on passenger cars 68 inches or wider. One of the first changes was to make it applicable to all vehicles as of 1 January 1969, regardless of width. This car is under 56 inches wide, which is less than 68. Given the short –windshield– windscreen, longer blades weren’t possible, so they met the standard with a third wiper. If you weren’t in North America, you only got two; oh, say, can you see?
At first I thought this car might not be all of a piece; the front and rear side markers don’t match. The front ones are Lucas L824s, and the rears are L841s. Nothing wrong with that functionally, it’s just a little visually jarring. But it appears that’s how they were built. How veddy odd!
How come they didn’t get the small car?
That’s a good question. Here’s another: I’m not totally unaware of Monty Python, so how did I manage not to come up with
I like MGs…
I like MGs…
They only come up to you knees…
Yet they’re always friendly and they’re ready to to please!
“Which is why you should buy them in threes”!
Winner!
It’s somewhere between a ’69 and ’74 at latest. I kind of like the look without bumpers. My ’74 had big ugly rubber covered over-riders on the chrome front bumper and each of the rear “bumperettes”, which stuck out like sore thumbs. I would have liked to have had them removed, but since I owned it in the mid 80’s I was quite sure their removal would have left unsightly corroded sections of the bumpers in their stead. The ’75 that I owned at the same time had the even less appealing rubber bumpers. Loved those darn cars, but I was in my early 20’s, much more limber and leaner then, and had much more patience for their eccentricities than I would as my current curmudgeonly self.
They went to MK1 Sprite style rounded rear wheel arches in 1972 and continued until they needed the stronger square arches for 5 mph bumper support in 1975.
’69 Midgets have different lighting (smaller rear lights with red turn signals, non-illuminated side markers with the front marker aft of the front wheel), so I presume that narrows this down to ’70-’71.
As recently as 2014, the Toyota FJ Cruiser was equipped with 3 front wipers for the very same reasons. It appears it was so equipped outside North America as well.
…!
I never noticed that until you made me look.
That’s okay; we know lights are your thing. 🙂
I loved the earlier models, had 3 soft top Sprites (all second hand ) from early ’60s to late ’70s (not the frogeye), great little sports car for English roads. even drove one of them from London to Marrakesh and back on holiday in about ’73. Great fun
Well, it wasn’t named the Midget for no reason.
Fun cars. I had a Bugeye and a later rollup window Sprite. I prefer the later cars just for the trunk lid and it’s cheaper too. Like all small cars, you just have to be very careful on multi-lane highways. Too many oblivious cell phone using big SUV drivers.
They’re a blast to drive, and amazingly large drivers will fit. It’s like a go-kart, or actually wearing the car. We had a ’60 Bugeye, but would take one of these too, both are equally fun.
The first Clenet neoclassics used a Midget body, doors, and windshield.
Actually a buddy of mine in England just emailed me that he bought a 1978 rubber bumper Midget. I think it would be much better suited to winding English B series roads than a lot of North American conditions.
He is considerable shorter than me, so it would be a good fit.
Of course this is descended from the Austin Healey bugeye Sprite. As time progressed the original charm was chipped away with every change…
I am 6 foot and was perfectly comfortable driving the Sprites, I do agree though that they were perfectly suited for European country roads, having driven thousands of miles in many trips to USA I would not feel safe at all in one.
To those who have seen my other posts, it will come as NO surprise that I say I don’t care what this midget is,but might make a nice spare to easily fit into the trunk of a 70s GREAT AMERICAN LAND YACHT. 😅 🤣 😂 😉.
Those are factory Midget wheels for a ‘70.
A big problem is that they are so low, drivers in SUVs, CUVs, and light trucks can look right over the top of them in a lane change situation.
The issue is not the car, per se, but the car in a typical current mix of roads and traffic. Similar to a Smart car, which is not “too small”, but often “too small for current conditions “.
If they were cast alloy, those wheels would like right at home on a 21st century car. Oh, and 3 or 4 inches larger in diameter and a few inches wider. Otherwise, the appearance is very similar to several modern Toyota pickup/SUV wheels. I drove a friend’s Sprite of this generation a block or two when I was in college. Even with no top, I found it cozy, and I’m under 6 ft and was pretty skinny in those days. I can’t imagine spending much time in it with a hardtop.
The standard steel wheels for many Midgets and the first generation Capri (among others) was the four-spoke “ROstyle” wheel, originally manufactured by Rubery Owen in the UK (the “RO” in “ROstyle”, often written as “Rostyle”). IIRC, the wheels pictured on this Midget were also produced by Rubery Owen, but they were particularly short-lived. I do not know why they were not kept in production, as they are very attractive wheels, IMO.
One way to imagine how tiny these cars are, is to know that those are 13 inch wheels and tires on them. Roughly the same ones that look so tiny and lost on old Pintos, Capris, Toyotas, and so on.
My Mk 1 Fiesta had 12” wheels and I “+1’ed” to 13” Capri Rostyles. The width and offset didn’t play well with the Fiesta’s geometry and exaggerated the already poor torque steer and kickback. I sold the Capri wheels to a guy with a Pinto.
Yep ;
Another wonderful Little British Car that’s fun to drive and cheap to own but kinda scary in city traffic .
These used the rev. happy ‘B’ series BMC engine .
-Nate
These used the “A” Series engine, as did the early Minis. The “B” Series went into the MGA, MGB, and Magnette, and it was a bit larger. Just to set the record straight.
Correct ~ thank you for catching that .
The diminutive ‘A’ series engines were very rev. happy when compared to their ‘B’ series brethren .
My self, I prefer the ‘B’ series .
All are well engineered but have a shorter than ideal service life even when well maintained .
-Nate
My roommate at UT had a Midget. It was fun cruising Austin and the hills west of town in the early ‘70’s until some drunk rear-ended us. The car was repaired but never was the same after that.
In the right circumstance one of these would be great fun. I looked at buying one a couple of years ago. I am 6′ and long legged, and there was plenty of room, vertically as it were. Width would be a problem for larger folks.
I love that these are the “White Castles” of sports cars. Why not have three?
When you realize that your MGB is just too damn big!
Great story and photos Daniel. The contrast between this meek Midget, and that guy’s voluptuous gut in photo#3, is hilarious.