What if I had bought a different Roadster

General Discussion Forums Car Talk
1

I just bought a Mk 3.5 last month and love it. No regrets whatsoever, other than I am not in it every waking second!

As part of my research into it, I seriously considered the MG TF, particularly the very last of the line Chinese-built cars. And even then, the very last model year with the Euro wing mirrors and new style alloys (some of you will know what I’m talking about).

It was a fairly close thing but the MX-5 won out because it was cheaper to buy and run, and I sensed fundamentally more modern. The last TF was a model year-changed ‘facelifted facelift’ whose roots lay somewhere in the early 1990s. The MX-5 is also the more handsome car.

I also considered a Mini Roadster and was seriously intrigued by it…apparently they drive very well though the ride in Cooper S form is just too firm.

So purely as a thought experiment I’m wondering what might have been if I’d gone for one of these alternatives. Has anyone driven either of the above and what are their thoughts on it v. the MX-5?

2

Those end of line MGTFs sold here weren’t Chinese built. Sure, MG built a few for the Chinese market. But all the cars for the UK were assembled at Longbridge (from CKD kits).

1500×1123 294 KB

1500×1123 375 KB

I think most who would have brought any of the above cars would be happy with their purchase, for lots of different reasons. There will be some who be unhappy, regretful; there always is. If you asked MX5 owners who had driven a MINI Roadster/MGTF, invariably they will remark about the problems and then why they brought the MX5. Ask the same question of a MGTF, MINI owner, and what answer do you think will be given? The MGTF owner who tried out a MX5 will come back and say they preferred the MG (insert any reason about spec, heritage, price, handling etc).

You would have probably signed up to a relevant forum, and asked the same question.

Looks are subjective; I don’t much care for the mid-noughties tic tac MX5, but others like it. Curious, you thought about a MR MGTF, that was based on a 1995 design and a FWD car that was essentially a shopping car without a roof. But not the Z4 (probably the E85)?

I’m not going to state any of these cars are “better” or “worse” than whatever iteration of the MX5 you purchased; that would be to disrespect the people who do buy and enjoy these models (and who also might have considered the MX5 and discounted it).

But I am biased in my rating of the best MX5 version out there.

2 Likes
3

Coincidentally my son and I were discussing MX-5 alternatives just yesterday. He made me laugh when he said the MGF was just a Metro going backwards. :grin:

2 Likes
4

The MGF & TF were mid-engined rear wheel drive.

5

Yes, the Mid-Rear (MR) MG and the FWD MINI

6

K series engines and part hydrolastic suspension so it must be a Metro going backwards!!!
:heart:

1 Like
7

I always thought the MG F used two Metro subframes, one at each end.
The front hubs are the same as the rear, but with the drive shafts removed?

8

I thought that on the later MG’s they dispensed with the hydrolastic suspension and where worse off for it. I think the change was when it went from the MGF to the MG TF.

9

Most, but not all, MGfs were Hydragas. MGTFs were on coil springs and much stiffer. Years ago I had an MGF and MX5 Mk2.5 at the same time. I’d often take one for a run and then the other.

I bought another MX5 years later (the NC1 I now have) but in the meantime owned 3 Z4s and a Boxster. I bought the Mazda on balance of cost, reliability and performance.

I’d gladly have another Boxster but at the expense of one of my other toys as its a considerably more expensive ownership experience.

1 Like
10

Another car gets curiously overlooked, despite the very good period reviews, the Toyota MRS/Mk3 MR2

1280×857 325 KB

11

Nice car but the problem with that version of the MR2 is that there is practically zero boot space. If you think the ND has little stowage try one of these.

12

Is that the reason the MR2 is excluded from discussions of sports cars, no boot space. Then the MGF, Boxster, Elise, Elan M200 should not be debated, as they are automatically eliminated at the first hurdle of important criteria for a sportscar, headed by the number 1 consideration, boot space…

Lets throw in the E-Class Cabriolet into the mix. Has huge boot; in fact, in a convertible that isn’t on a millionaire’s buying list, you can’t get a bigger boot. Sure it handles like a drunken sailor, but look at the boot space.

The biggest issue with the MRS is that its the Lego Roadster. Styling is bland, with its Corolla-esque front end. It doesn’t look sporty, but then, neither did the NC1, with its tictac Moray Callum styling. 15 years on, and if its in the ubiquitous silver, that many seem to be, with those huge headlights now accusingly yellowed, it seems to be a car languishing at the back of the year with the other P/Exs. Toyota took some corporate decision not to develop it on; the after market showed that the basic shape, with some judicious panel swaps, could have been updated into quite an attractive car, which might have overcome resistance in the sportscar community to a lack of boot space.

The MGTF was a dated model, even new. The MGF was highly rated, for a short while. And for a little while, outsold the MX5 on the UK market (and I think Australia), proving brand heritage counts a long way. The collapse of MG-Rover was not kind to it, with many being killed off prematurely due to lack of parts (for a while).

The BMW Z3 has been all but forgotten now; we’re reminded it existed with the Goldeneye reruns. The MX5 competitor was that underpowered 1.9 version; bit of a cruiser, but then, some people look to the MX5 as a cruiser for sundays.

The Z4 has some rusting problems it seems, especially in the early versions. Again, the base models are underpowered, and a bit stodgy.

MINI Roadster. Take an ugly MINI and make it into an ugly Tonka toy. Pretty sure I had one when young, and it was sonic controlled. One of those models when MINI was deluded in thinking it had a solution for every customer all off a single platform

Another into the mix, because people did think about these:

Fiat Barchetta; borderline collectible now. Stylish, not particularly sporty to drive. Todays forum conversation would be who did the RHD conversion

Honda CRX Mk3/ Del Sol; I see these are bouncing back in value, maybe on the coat tails of the rixing Mk2 CRX. Transtop version had trick targa roof.

Suzuki Cappuchino; Tiny, most have dissolved in water.

Honda Beat; tiny, blown up engines, abandoned except by the masochistic JDM fan

Lotus Elise; not affordable

Lotus Elan M200; chunky shutlines, no longer affordable. Kia clone rare as hens teeth (intriguing as it had Kia’s copy of the BP engine Mazda used in the NA/NB)

Vauxhall VX220; rare, unaffordable

In 2001, Mazda identified the main competitors to the upcoming NC at:

Toyota MRS
Fiat Barchetta
MGTF
Lotus Elise
Vauxhall/Opel VX220
BMW Z3 1.9

13

Saz,

I wasn’t excluding it (the MR2) from the discussion about alternative sports cars. I was just pointing out that it had very little storage space and as you know many people make the point that the ND has less stowage than the NC. It is just one of the features that some people may use to help with their choice.

Isn’t boot space just as much of a discriminating feature to be considered in a discussion about alternative sports cars and where did I say that it was the first consideration?

Cheers.

14

Interesting comments. BTW, the pictures are super but they are not of the end of the line model. Yes, they are the Chinese-owned models, but the very final year saw the bigger Euro wing mirrors introduced. And the orange was no longer available since I believe as that was a special edition (LE500?) brought out to celebrate the new MG ownership. I believe.

But your point is valid - they were built in Longbridge right to the end.

15

I’ll throw another one in, which my parents owned in yellow (!), the Pininfarina-styled Peugeot 306 of 94-02.The facelift in particular was a very handsome car. I think it just about counts as a roadster rather than a convertible. Important to get the more potent 2.0 car with the ABS and passenger airbag as standard. The 1.6 was just too weak. I remember driving it up to Ronda from Marbella in Spain years ago with four of us in it - up the hills was laborious and braking on some gravel downhill on the way back was an interesting moment for sure…

1 Like
16

Have you owned or been in a boxster? It has significantly more boot space than my NC mx5. The low flat boxer engine means it has a boot at the rear and at the front. The front boot is big enough for two carry on suitcases and the rear one is about on par with an ND boot.

Of all the ones you mention, the boxster is the only one that actually has any boot space.

1 Like
17

I actually had a mini coupe last year (based on the same platform as the roadster).

It was hilarious to drive as a road car, great handling, nice interior, felt quite premium (certainly compared to an NC) and looked nice. However, the dreadful co-developed with peugeot engine was a disaster. I sunk huge amounts of money into having my timing belt and all the guides re-done, and it still kept a persistent EML light. The direct injection meant the valves were constantly covered in ■■■■ and idle was horrendous.

Also when pushing on track, the front end just couldn’t deal with really tight corners. It had superb grip through sweeping bends and couod get its nose into a country road just fine, but a track hairpin, my friends lower powered mx5 just kept making up the distance.

I wouldn’t have another.

I would have another boxster, it was superb in every way imaginable, aside from the running costs!

18

Didn’t they change the engine in 2010/11 and that fixed most of the problems? Or was that the newer engine, just still not properly sorted. On the other hand I don’t hear of Minis with rust problems…

19

Mine was a 2012…. It definitely wasn’t sorted. Horrific clatter of timing chain guide rails

You’re right though, no rust!

20

I suspect the Boxster is the ultimate roadster when you take into account brand, luxury, power as well as handling and drive. A top-end Z4 is probably not a million miles behind.

My guess (don’t shoot me) is that many MX-5 buyers want something that gives maximum joy per £ spent. In that sense, it is a very cost-efficient car even when you factor in the compulsory £500 sunk cost of rustproofing the underside.