1971 MG BGT Reviews

1971 MG BGT 1.8 from North America

Year of manufacture1971
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 1.8 Manual
Performance marks 3 / 10
Reliability marks 5 / 10
Comfort marks 1 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
3.0 / 10
Previous carVolvo 244

Summary:

A performance car without PERFORMANCE part, I bought this car on looks only

Faults:

A reliable little car to my suprise. During the 2 years I owned this car I virtually had nothing go wrong with the car, although I had to do, valve adjustments, tune ups and Carburetor adjustments from time to time. The engine was professionally rebuilt before I purchased it and extremely healthy. I also replaced the trim. And the gauges were finicky obviously needed rebuilding. The heater control turn knobs were a joke.

General Comments:

Although this car was in very good mechanical shape it never had the performance of a real sports car even from the era it came from. It was a big let down in that regard. The handling was good in tight driving situations. The rear end could get jarred easily going over bumps at high speed cornering. Overall a decent handling car without enough power to get you into too much trouble.

The engine in this car was in excellent condition and properly tuned for max performance. Even so I was not too impressed with that engine. Doggy and not that high revving. Similar performance to a 122 Volvo I once had. I did like the way the car shifted through the gears. I have driven other MG's (1622cc and up) and they are all pretty close to the same in performance and without overdrive they run into the 4000 rpm + cruising range, which gets old quick. Let's face it Mg's were not about high performance.

The styling of the car was what caught my eye. Like a mini Aston, if you will. Back Seats? Ha. For your groceries only.

If I were to have another affordable British sports car I would probably get a Triumph of some sort. They seem more serious of a performance car with more horsepower. Although I've heard those later swing axles were a nightmare.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 17th July, 2007

1971 MG BGT 1.8L Twin SU from North America

Model year1971
Year of manufacture1971
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 1.8L Twin SU Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 1 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.8 / 10
Distance when acquired85000 miles
Most recent distance86000 miles
Previous carMG BGT

Summary:

The greatest poise, performance and fun you can get for the money

Faults:

So far nothing has gone wrong with the car. I've only owned it for 10 days, but I expect to sort out some of the misteps of my predecessor.

General Comments:

The chrome bumper MG's are a great way to get into classic British sports cars without spending too much. Many are priced well beyond their value, at least in the US. These aren't Jags, they're MG's.

I particularly find the lines of the GT striking, better than any fixed head save for the MGA and the GT-6 Mk I. An absolute blast to drive, not fast by any stretch, but the sense of speed is subjective, not objective. A real eye catcher, and easy to maintain. This is my third MG, and second GT. I recommend them, as well as any "BMC" or "LBC", to anyone who likes to drive and is handy, and doesn't want to race others at stop lights. Remember, handy is important.

MG's can be very reliable if properly handled. My previous GT was a daily driver in all kinds of weather for five years. I drove it cross country, even with a heavy load, and it just kept going.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 12th August, 2005

7th Dec 2006, 14:28

Please don't post a comment after owning the car for only 10 days. This presents the information inaccurately... after you get some experience with the vehicle, then write your review so we can have a better-grounded opinion to read.

25th Jan 2007, 22:51

To the above poster. This is my third MGB. I have driven primarily MG's of one kind or another the entire time I have been a licensed driver. Regardless of the individual quirks this particular car may have, I think I can speak to the qualities the model line as a whole delivers.

This particular car has had the following mechanical work done since the purchase date, none of which was to correct a mechanical failure:

New front springs, polyurethane bushings, and heavy duty shock valving on stock lever arms.

New rear rally springs with polyurethane bushings and heavy duty shock valving on stock lever arms.

Heavier front anti-sway bar.

15" Minilites with Firestone Firehawk Indy 500's.

Engine rebuilt, bored.060 over with a fast street cam and various other upgraded components.

The car is driven regularly, auto-crossed and rallied. I suppose I still can't comment on the nature of these cars seeing as this car is no longer as it was, but if you are interested in a 35 year old British sportscar designed and built to last 10 years tops, chances are you can use a wrench and know what you're looking at. It hardly spreads false information to speak about the aesthetic and performance characteristics of a car when both are more readily verifiable than long term reliability. Nonetheless, in the right hands, an MGB is a very hearty, durable, enjoyable sportscar. Something tells me you don't have one, or you have too many that don't run.

10th Feb 2007, 06:29

I'm thinking on buying a 70s classic right now (with the Mercedes w116 barge at the top of the list), however a well sorted MGBGT would be an attractive proposition. I'm 6'4" and a bit on the lanky side so whats the leg/headroom like?

Average review marks: 4.9 / 10, based on 2 reviews