Same car sold at auction for ÂŁ12,500 in June.
A year ago, KGF was asking ÂŁ23,000 for an ultra-low miles (to the point of being unusable) Berkley
Doesn’t t the OP have just the right amount of spare change in his pocket at the moment? 
Not that bloody thing again!
The perfect car for this conversion. Just put the mechanicals in a box somewhere. It’s not like it was a particularly good spec from a driving perspective.
Probably need to explain why its the “perfect car” to convert, and why its a better car to convert than a NC or ND with a blown engine.
The article indicates 0-60 went from 8.5 to 6 seconds, implying the donor car was a 1.8. How was that not a “particularly good spec from a driving perspective”? There are enough clues to indicate this donor was a 1.8 S-Special, with the Bilstein suspension, thickened front ARB, Torsen LSD, dropped steering rack. Its a rather good spec of MX5. The NA set the benchmark for all MX5s, and there is debate which is the better drive, a 4.3 Torsen diff 1.8 NA or the 4.1 VLSD 1.6 NA. I drove a launch ND at Goodwood. I thought it was a great car. It almost drove as well as my NA.
I was referring to the Berkeley. From memory, it was pretty basic apart from the leather and paint.
I’d rather have an electric NA than NB or NC as they look nicer, are lighter to start with, and just feel a lot rawer to drive. I think this last bit would help make up for the lack of noise or gear shifting.
But the MGB, post 1972, has a significantly higher kerb weight than the NC, and yet has a number of successful EV conversions, eg RBW, BEE, Frontline. The intriguing possibility of the NC and ND is where the original motor is. The NC onwards are front-mid engined cars, given how the engines relate to the front axle. That has interesting implications. I know these converters claim to maintain balance, but I have never seen those claims actually scrutinised.
This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.