You have to hand it to MG: they knew how to stretch the life of a design well beyond any notion of a sell-by date. The MGB and the Midget are certainly a testament to that philosophy, but they were not the first MGs to have gone on for too long. The TF was, in a way, a foretaste of the sad rubber-bumper MGB.
The MG TF was the last of a long line of roadsters going back to the MG TA launched in 1936. It was not the most advanced design even then, but MG made it work – the T-Type (a.k.a Midget, but we’ll not use that name here to avoid confusion with the better-known ‘60s/’70s Midget) had bags of charm, a willing engine, a capable chassis and a low price. When it resurfaced after the Second World War, now known as the TC, the little MG became the darling of every G.I. stationed in the UK. MG couldn’t build enough of them.
In 1950, MG launched the TD. It was a far more civilized version of the now-familiar formula: a fun little roadster with early ‘30s styling and a peppy 1250cc OHV twin carb engine. The chassis was new though: a coil-sprung IFS replaced the leaf-sprung beam axle and rack-and-pinion steering was added. Let it not be claimed that MG failed to change with the times. At least, chassis-wise, because in terms of looks, the car would have looked perfectly contemporary in 1932. The MG Y saloon was pretty much in the same prewar vein.
The TD was a great success, especially for its main export market – over two thirds of production was shipped over to the US alone. It was a lot more liveable than the TC, could be ordered in LHD and had decent weather protection (for a British roadster of the period). But time ticked on and certain features, or lack thereof, were starting to raise eyebrows: no fuel gauge, a rather lymphatic 75-80mph top speed, the traditional ash-framed body construction… MG were busy designing a completely new model – a true “reboot,” as we’d call it nowadays. But there was a snag.
In 1952, MG, as part of the Nuffield organization (Morris – MG – Riley – Wolseley) merged with Austin, creating the mighty BMC. Priorities necessarily changed very quickly and MG were allowed to press ahead with the new Magnette saloon, but told to hold off their planned roadster. The interloper was Donald Healey, whose project with Austin had reached its final pre-production stage. Even though the Healey 100 was to be a larger model than the MG, it was still a roadster and thus BMC felt it best to delay the new MG for a bit.
There was clearly an expectation of something completely different to be coming from MG in short order, and demand for it was there. This manifested in the Arnolt-MG, mating the TD chassis with a classy Italian four-seater body, available either open or closed. Several dozens of these expensive exotics were sold in the US in 1953, although Arnolt never reached the planned 200 units, due in no small part to MG stopping the supply of chassis without explanation. Some have surmised that MG did not have the capacity to manufacture extra chassis, but they might also have been a bit miffed that some self-important importer showed their car up as being old-fashioned.
But MG roadsters were old-fashioned, that was part of their charm and image. It was just becoming harder to sustain were every passing year, and the clock was now up to 1953 – the year of the Corvette, of the Mercedes Ponton and, far more dangerously for MG, of the Triumph TR2.
In desperation for something even marginally close to being new, the Abingdon works gave the TD a noticeable facelift – they dared to put the headlights in the fenders and to give the grille a jaunty angle! – and called it the TF.
What happened to the TE, by the way? Apparently, apart from the moniker sounding a little childish (tee-hee!), all internal production and parts codes at MG that featured the letter “E” stood for “Experimental.” So the powers that be just skipped the letter to avoid internal confusion and external mockery. A compelling reason, if there ever was one.
Aside from the front end, MG also provided a brand new dash layout with three octagonal dials, one of which contained a fuel and a temperature gauge. Oh, the luxury! Everything chassis-wise was identical to the TD, so it was really a case of old wine, barely new bottle.
In mid-1954, MG figured they might as well provide the TF with a little extra oomph, so the TF 1500 took over. Power output jumped from 58 to 63hp and top speed could reach 85mph, winds and terrain permitting. This was still based on the prewar Morris/MG design, not the B-Series that was to be found in the upcoming MGA.
Our feature car here rolled off the production line in 1954, but before the 1500 motor. Which makes it the most common and least interesting type of MG TF. By the time the MGA was finally allowed to take over in late 1955, the final examples of the 9600 TFs ever made had already made it across the Pond. Only 3400-odd TFs got the bigger engine.
The TF was a last-minute transitional model, so it’s unfair to expect it to provide anything really new. That was its successor’s job. I guess as the last of this particular type of Mohicans, it does have its place in MG’s history. It’s just not a very attractive car, to my eyes. The 1.5 litre variant is objectively somewhat interesting, but all the 1953-54 ones have going for them is the revised dash. Old-timey MGs need separate headlights and a vertical grille, anything else just feels a bit wrong.
Nice pics, and info. Just to clarify one detail, the TF1500 had an enlarged version (known as XPEG) of the previous 1250cc XPAG engine, which was a pre-war design. So, although similar in capacity, it had no commonality with the 1500 B series engine, with which the MGA was launched.
Duly noted, with many thanks — I amended the text.
In the late 1950s when I was discovering that I was a gearhead, I read an article about MGs. I don’t remember who the author was or what publication it was in, but regarding the TF, the author said, “It was hard for diehards, including your author, to accept the cute in place of the beautiful.”
Morgan underwent a similar front-end restyling around this time, although I don’t know the exact model year. I understand that Lucas had given notice that they could no longer justify making the stand-alone headlamps.
I’ll be the contrarian here and say that the TF was my favorite of the postwar, pre-B MG’s. There were quite a few TD’s, TF’s and A’s running a round when I was coming of automotive awareness age in the early 1960’s, and an occasional TC. The TC was cool but already seemed like an antique; the A looked like a discount version of a Jag XK or big Healey, and the TD didn’t even have the classic style of the TC. Whereas the TF had a sleek shape that still looked good. Until the B came along. Note that’s from the perspective of a five year old, and my 65 year old memories of that time. But I still like the TF.
I’m with you on the virtues of the TF. I didn’t know that they originally came with the smaller engine. Thanks, dman and Tatra87 for your postings. The photos really capture the beauty of this car!
The big negative of the TD was that it came with steel wheels; the TF brought back the classic wire wheels.
I vacillated between the TD and TF. I like them both for their specific qualities; the TD was the last with the classic front end and the TF had the wire wheels, the 1500 engine (preferably) and the front end styling was done quite well.
I had completely forgotten about the wheels. That may indeed have been the tipping point that made 6 year old me dislike the TD. Thanks for mentioning that.
The very young man who designed the TD was never happy with the TF. He thought they were moving backwards and not forwards. Later he became the chief draughtsman, overseeing the bodies of the MGA AND MGB. He was proud of the TD as it opened up the American market to the British car industry, the MGB in particular.
I’m 67, have owned two MGB’s (’73, ’79), and agree 100% with your assessment. I believe your opinion of the TD might improve a little by watching the McMillan and Wife episode, “Downshift to Danger” in which Sally’s yellow TD saves the day in the characteristic stalwart yet humble fashion associated with MG’s.
I just love those octagonal gauges in the instrument panel.
My late father was a T-series fan. I remember having to go to a local convenience store when I was a teenager, to buy the Sunday paper (usually Austin or Dallas), so he could check the classified ads for older MGs. He subscribed to Hemmings Motor News just for the MG ads. He once toyed with the idea of just buying one from Octagon Motors (a period HMN advertiser) and having the car shipped to him, until my mother pointed out that Octagon was based in the UK, and we were then in Hawaii, courtesy of the U.S. Army. She reasoned that shipping a car across two oceans was both costly and a bit problematic (our ’71 Plymouth Fury was damaged being shipped from California to Hawaii). He never got to own an MG, but he was also interested in motorcycles, and he did get to own a variety of bikes, ranging from two BSA 441 Victors to a Yamaha 650 Special to two Harley- Davidson Sportsters over the years before he died.
You may know that Cecil Kimber’s dining room table was octagonal, so the MG logo was likewise.
A perfectly valid reason!
Long time MG fan here, having owned/flipped 14 MGB and MGB/GTs (my personal favorite). Have to heartily disagree, the TF is imo far better looking with a flair missing from the C, so beloved by the ultra-traditionalists, and D models. Always wanted one, but the closest I ever came was when I looked at a red ’54 1250 in York PA around ’92/93 but it needed a full restoration and he wouldn’t budge at all on price, to my chagrin. Yet another unrequited love, c’est la vie.
While they’re awfully cute, I find it strange that during my childhood in the 1960s I never saw an MG T-Series. I saw a fair number of MG As and Bs and Triumph TR-3s, but never an MG T-Series. (I also never saw a “bug-eye” Sprite, a Morgan, or a Lotus Super 7.)
Although I have owned one, I was always a fan of MGs. My experience is mostly with the MG B and the concurrent Midget, but about 10 years ago I discovered a neighbour has a TD.
Early in my working life, in the early 70s I had a boss who used to race MGs. As a paper weight on his desk he used a valve from a twin cam MGA that he had blown the engine in. The valve stem had a remarkable curve in it. I wish I had taken a picture of it, but in those days of film it was not something you did. After he moved to MGBs he won the Canadian championship.
Yep the twink MGA was phenomenally fragile
Melting the headlights into the fenders was something GM did in the late 1930’s that I really disliked. Ford made a clean break from the past, styling wise, never mind mechanical antiquity. MG should have just waited for the completely new body as well.
Je moet je realiseren dat de MG TF Midget in 2 weken is ontworpen en handgebouwd met componenten die in eerdere auto,s waren gebruikt.Zoals de spatborden met ingebouwde koplampen en het schuine radiatorfront en aflopende motorkap.
De MG A was al ontworpen en had al in diverse race,s getoond dat deze auto een mooie opvolger van de TD zou zijn.Nog steeds op het ladderchassis maar de directie verbood dat omdat de Austin Haeley net op de markt kwam en veel duurder was.Ze wilden niet hun eigen concurent worden
Yeah, the problem was that idiots like me stuffed them into trees
The TF was a placeholder until Kimber and Enever could get the MGA into production.
I too loved the MG TD as a child, I owned at ’52 for some years, they were good looking and fun to drive but not really made for speed .
-Nate