I spent 20quid on the lotto tonight since I found out these had been released...
Clicky (http://classicdriver.co.uk/uk/find/4100_results.asp?sorderby=tblManufacturers%2EsName+ASC%2C+tblModels%2EsModel+ASC%2C+bOfficial+DESC%2C+tblCars%2EsType+ASC&action=simple%5Fsearch&coopid=0&lmanufacturer=10089&lcurrency=2&next=4100%5Fresults%2Easp&dealerid=0&bsubmit=true&bclicked=false&bshowstock=Wahr&whatbutton.x=0&page=0&lmodelflag=13072)
I think thats what MG shouldve made all along and not some slow 1.8 thing.
They also shouldve used TVR V8s
Ok so they shouldve kept the 1.8 model for the posers, but get into the V8 end and the straigt 6 that TVR do now.
What they should have done was build good, well put together cars.
Unfortunately all they did was bodykit old rover designs
Quote from: mr_rollThey also shouldve used TVR V8s
Why?!
TBH MG Rover just made boring, unappealing cars. And the one time they tried to be daring (for the production market anyway) they made something that cost twice as much as it needed to and wasnt all that great a drive. If theyd have ignored the CFRP hype and gone for GFRP or even ally, people might have been able to stomach the price and the badge together :shock:
79,950 GBP - you what :shock:
yeah they look good
but considering the other cars you could get for that price Im not surprised rover went under
Quote from: funkychicken9000Quote from: mr_rollThey also shouldve used TVR V8s
Why?!
TBH MG Rover just made boring, unappealing cars. And the one time they tried to be daring (for the production market anyway) they made something that cost twice as much as it needed to and wasnt all that great a drive. If theyd have ignored the CFRP hype and gone for GFRP or even ally, people might have been able to stomach the price and the badge together :shock:
it was brilliant to drive. the price was the only downer on it as far as most people where concerned.
p.s. i won Ã,£6.90 on the lotto :p
Quote from: DEViANCEit was brilliant to drive. the price was the only downer on it as far as most people where concerned.
The SV-R was nice to drive. It was a bit of a laugh, if you ignored the somewhat strangled feeling engine. And thats fine, but youve got to remember that there are OTHER car companies out there besides MG Rover (sometimes I think you forget this), and theyre also producing nice cars. And the only way the SV-R looked even slightly attractive compared to them was if you completely put the price to the back of your mind. Lets do a quick check shall we:
Take the TVR Tuscan S Mk. 2. Its 400kg lighter without resorting to silly CFRP, holds an extra 108bhp/ton over the SV-R, thrashes it to 60 by a second, and is faster to boot. Its also much much much nicer to drive (dont take my word for it, feel free to look up reviews) and... you guessed it, it costs OVER Ã,£30K LESS. Anyone whos spent decent time with both of them would take the TVR in a second, even if the MG was Ã,£30k cheaper.
It was a nice idea by MGR, but putting a big engine in a carbon fibre car and slapping a big pricetag on it does not a sportscar make. And thats why most of them sat in the factory without owners.
And this is just personal opinion, but
this = :gag:
The center console looks like theyve bought it from poundland but the rest of the interior is nice I think.
Quote from: mr_rollThe center console looks like theyve bought it from poundland but the rest of the interior is nice I think.
They probably did tbh. And if I was spending Ã,£85k on a car, I wouldnt want to get in it and think "Ooh, that looks cheap".
And at night everyone will think theyre being followed by a 1.2 Punto..
Jaimz :rock:
I doubt theyd have retailed for Ã,£80k, but yeah all they really needed to do was put a decent engine in the normal mgf.
Quote from: sdpI doubt theyd have retailed for Ã,£80k, but yeah all they really needed to do was put a decent engine in the normal mgf.
Ã,£82,950 for the SV-R is what I read...
Retail? Wow, they were nuts then :shock:
Looks sexy in black though :lol:
(http://classicdriver.co.uk/upload/cars/1337/1718357/biga.jpg)