(first posted 8/3/2012) Yes, MG was a rather conservative outfit. Not the flaming right wing that Morgan staked out, but compared to the other popular British sports car makers – Triumph, Austin-Healey and Jaguar – by the early fifties, the TD and TF were looking mighty old-fashioned. Pressured by drooping sales and the competition, in 1955 MG took a giant step forward, ditching the 1920s look for…the 1949 look. And by the time it was replaced in 1962, the cycle had repeated. Not the right kind of habits to develop in a rapidly changing world, as MG would find out soon enough: Keep up or Die.
But let’s not dwell on the gloomy side; the MGA is all about enjoying life, with the wind in one’s hair on a mild summer day, like this one’s owner has been doing quite a bit lately. And like I did, in 1968.
I’ve been on the prowl for a suitable CC MGA for years; there’s plenty hanging around the Sports Car Shop, but you know how I like them. And then I saw this one in traffic, and gave pursuit. Not that that was all too hard, although we did both have 1500 cc engines, and his was a low slung sports car. But I had forty horsepower on him. No contest; not that there ever was one.
The origins of the MGA go back to the 1951 EX172 LeMans racer, a TD chassis with an aerodynamic body. But the narrow TD frame meant that the seating position was still high and upright. A prototype with a new wider frame and corresponding seating was developed, but nixed by BMC Leonard Lord, in part because he had just made an agreement with Donald Healey to produce the Austin Healey.
That handsome roadster arrived in 1953, intended to bridge the gap between the Jaguar XK 120 and the MG with its $2985 price tag. Utilizing a 2660 cc Austin A90 four cylinder, it followed the XK 120 in using its top speed as part of its name.
Then Triumph upset the applecart; that very same year, its TR2 appeared, and really put the pressure on MG. Priced only $250 more than the old-school TF, the TR2 packed 90 hp from its 2 liter four, and did the sprint to sixty in 12 seconds. MG could only dream about that.
So Lord had no choice but to rush the MGA into production, lest BMC’s little hard-currency cow go dry.
Its handsome and suitably low-slung steel body was draped over a traditional frame, with the side rails pushed out to allow the flat-on-the plywood seating position that a modern roadster called for. Well, not the plywood, exactly; but it did the trick. Probably lasted longer than if it had been the usual un-rustproofed steel.
The only (external) concession to tradition was the grille, an attempt to keep the heritage alive. It’s not very successful, in my opinion, and reminds me too much of the cheap “heritage” grilles that have been slapped onto so many cars over the years. How about stepping into the mid-fifties with both feet?
Under that sleek, long hood resided one of the early versions of BMC’s B-Series engines. Its roots were in the old 1200 cc Austin A40 Devon engine that originated before the war, but it was a larger block, and updated. The 1955 MGA arrived with a 68 hp rating, which was quickly boosted to 72. Compared to the TR 2, it was already well behind. And to rub more salt in the wound, in 1955 the improved TR3 now sported a full 100 hp, and a ten-plus second 0-60 time. With a 0-60 time of 16 seconds, the MGA clearly looked better (and faster) than it went.
Of course there were plenty of ways to improve the B-Series’ performance. What hurt it most was its poor breathing, thanks to siamesed ports on both the intake and exhaust. I shot this MGA with an aftermarket aluminum cross-flow head a while back at the Sports Car Shop, still awaiting its carburetors. But it still has a siamesed center exhaust port.
If you really had to have a fast MGA, it was available from the factory, from 1958 until 1960, in the form of the MGA Twin-Cam. 108 horses from its 1588 cc engine, almost exactly the same as my Xb. But that was hot stuff in 1958. And it clicked off the run to sixty in nine seconds.
Now that’s more like it! The twin Cam was doomed, though, due to issues with the engine that led to out-sized warranty claims, as well as a prohibitively high price. Costing almost 50% more than a regular A, it still was only slightly faster than a much cheaper TR3. The TC also sported four-wheel disc brakes, and those handsome knock-off wheels. Barely 2000 were made before the plug was pulled, but it did foreshadow what every modern sports car would eventually sport. And once a couple of issues were addressed, these engines turned out to be quite reliable. Oh well.
Like Jaguars’ XK series, the MGA also came in a coupe version. The flimsy and fussy contraptions that were supposed to keep the elements out on the roadsters just didn’t cut it with some folks, so a “fixed-head coupe” (non-removable) made rather a lot of sense, except of course on a sunny day. I caught this one in its element: winter in Eugene.
It’s a bit odd from some angles, which undoubtedly led MG to the superior hatch-back solution on the MGB-GT. But with roll-down windows,
and a nicer trimmed cabin, it would be the place to be when the skies turn gray. This one has been upgraded a bit further.
The visibility through the glass rear window alone was a huge improvement. The plastic windows of the old-school convertible tops went opaque almost instantly.
But its summer now, so let’s slide into the cockpit of this well-loved A. I wrote about my brother’s losing battle in keeping an MGA going in this chapter of the Auto-Biography. But the rides we took through the Maryland countryside in it were profoundly memorable.
Is that ever familiar. The big wheel, the pedals straight ahead in the dark tunnel, and the gear shift knob. If the expression “falls readily to hand” aver applied, it was to that shifter. Just inches away from the wheel rim, it made every notchy shift a pleasure. When you’re fifteen or so, these impressions run very deep.
Like the throb of the engine as the tach made its repeated unsuccessful assault on the red-line; my brother’s engine was way to geriatric to push that hard. Anyway, the long-stroke mill was much happier between “tick-over” and about 3500 rpm, 4500 in a push. All too soon, it croaked.
The owner of this well and long-loved MGA has had it since 1980, and replaced “a few” clutches along the way. The engine lost a piston, and was rebuilt a few years back. The next thing on the agenda? A new wiring harness; what else?
He’s got the right idea and approach: incremental improvements, spread out over the decades. The important thing is not to make it perfect, but just to keep it running, ready to roll come summer. Nothing too ambitious; in the true MG spirit.
With product like these (always a step behind), it’s a wonder MG lasted as long as they did, and as well regarded today (mostly by enthusiasts) as they were. And it’s not as if their “proven design” meant they were reliable either.
Sure, MG is still around, sort of, but today’s Chinese made MG isn’t exactly the same , is it?
They sure are still around – on my motorway trip home from work I’ve passed an unfamiliar orange hatchback several times over the past 2-3 months. Then I spotted the badges and realised it was a brand new MG MG6. Further investigation showed some of the new MGs are about to be available new here in New Zealand – photo below nicked from the MG-Rover NZ website. It does look a tad anonymous, but not ugly, and I really like the idea of driving something different. It doesn’t excite my senses like an MGA or MGB though.
mga is pretty… mgb looks like a shoebox. eye of thebeholder.
Q. for anyone who knows… but did the real MG of 1980 and before ever make their own engines or did they always buy austin engines?
MG started out as Morris Garages, owned by W.R.Morris, of Morris Automobiles. MGs used Morris engines, suitably modified, although there were some high-end engines that they developed mostly themselves. Morris merged with Austin (BMC) in 1952, so from then on, the engines were technically BMC engines. They didn’t have to “buy” them, as they were part of the same company. It’s like how engines were shared at GM.
I love cars like this. A classic British sports car owned by a guy who actually drives it. The ultimate hobby/transportation car (for the mechanically inclined).
I am enjoying this little MG time. Growing up in the midwestern US in the 1960s and 70s, these just were not around in any serious numbers, and none of them was owned by anyone of my age group. This piece answers the question why there seemed to be so many more Triumphs than MGAs around. More performance for your dollar (or pound) was certainly as important then as it is now.
Still, I find these beautiful little cars. Personally, I like the grille treatment, but maybe it’s just because I am so used to it and cannot imagine it any other way.
I had the opportunity to drive one of these off-and-on in late 1969-early 1970.
The car belonged to my first room mate in the air force when I arrived at Beale AFB in November, 1969. His 1958 MGA was exactly like the red one shown, but without rollbar. It was a chore starting the thing, as it was quite iffy as if it wanted to start, run or just sputter…
Once that car got going, boy, was it a blast to drive! Who cared if it was almost as slow as a VW Beetle? The satisfaction you received from motoring around in a real roadster and sitting on the floorboards was a blast, not to mention the screw-on side curtains with the plastic sliding “windows” that by then were of dubious translucency!
My roomie used t drive that thing to Reno/Tahoe to gamble every so often and it never stranded him.
He had it painted in spring, 1970. He didn’t keep it red. He had it painted “Big Bad Green”. I could have shot him…
All in all, one fun little car.
Of course, after all was said and done, NOTHING could beat my avatar – my 1964 Chevy Impala SS convertible. Yellow never looked so good! End of story.
Oh I love these — especially that white coupe. Is that Hardtop contraption somehow removable? Certainly a two man operation…… but just imagine how awesome.
Also the interior w/ sweet wooden steering wheel is making me drool.
No, this was a coupe, not a removable hardtop. One could buy that for an MG too. But the coupe had roll-up windows.
I got a removable hardtop for my MGB. It made driving in Illinois winters closer to tolerable. If the rocker panels hadn’t rusted out, it might have been warm. Maybe.
I don’t know what year my Dad’s MGA was, but it was red and had steel wheels with hubcaps and white walls. Because it was driven in NH while he was stationed at Pease AFB, it also had little to no floor left!
Is is true that everyone in the military (especially the Air Force) was issued a British roadster upon enlistment in the ’50s and ’60s? Or does it just seem that way? 😛
I remember in college, a Navy ROTC friend of mine was already trying to figure out what sports car to get for his “lieutenant-mobile” upon graduation and commission, and this was still a year away…must still be that way.
When I got out, it was SUVs and pickups that were required issue for military…the pickups tended to gravitate more to the officer ranks; they actually owned homes sometimes.
There weren’t any Mazda Miatas on our base parking lots…that I saw, anyway. Shoreside, the girls might have had a few; but not down by the pier parking areas for ships’ company.
I was (eventually) “issued” my avatar above – a 1964 Impala SS convertible, but I was just a humble airman!
British roadsters were indeed a common sight in NoCal in the late 60’s – early 70’s, however…
Me? I’m a full-size car cruisin’ guy…
My uncle was also at Pease in the early 60s, navigating KC-135s for SAC. He and my aunt shared a Peugeot (no idea what model, but a wagon), and a 1960 Saab 96. When he separated and moved back to Michigan, my two brothers got the Saab and they traded the Peugeot for a IH Scout. Same uncle later drove a Toronado.
The door cutouts look quite different on the awkward, contrived coupe as opposed to the roadster. Different years, perhaps?
Somehow I was spared the agony and heartburn of MG ownership, even as boys my older brother’s age got into it at the tail end. There were about three MGs in my high school parking lot; two MGBs and a Midget.
The Midget belonged to the brother of a friend. He’d bought a 1965 Mustang with money he made working the summer before his junior year (he’d been held back a year in grade school) but quickly got bored with it and begged and borrowed to buy the MG. And immediately regretted it…Lucas, the Prince of Darkness, was likely to strike the thing dead and dark at any time. Nor was it much of a chick magnet; that was the heyday of the musclecar. A Road Runner or Boss 302 with glasspacks could get the gearhead-girls easier.
With contraptions so crude and outdated and unresponsive to the market and technology, it’s not a tragedy the British motor industry collapsed – it was a mercy.
The doors were totally different on the coupe because it had roll-up windows.
The problem, as I understand it, with the MG A twin cam wasn’t even the engine as such. The SU carbs would go lean at a certain rpm due to a vibration and overheat the pistons. If they’d used a Weber carb or been able to isolate that vibration with a more flexible mount then the story might have turned out differently. Instead the factory tried lower compression, retarding ignition without much success except at reducing power.
I’ve read about the leaning-out problem, but I understand that for the most part (especially in the US) the main reason for engine problems with the Twin Cam was the difficulty of getting at such things as the oil filter, combined with too many American owners’ reluctance to get the muck from their typically grubby engines on their hands, much less their forearms.
And although your average British car owner is much more likely to do his own maintenance, up to and including a major overhaul, I’ve noticed in the “Our Cars” section of Classic & Sports Car magazine that even those avid DIY mechanics often experience failure in some part of their car that’s hard to get to. Perhaps if the car had been given the sort of engine access enjoyed by the early Sprites or Triumph Heralds and Spitfires the Twin Cams’ longevity would have been better assured.
the spitfire regardless of year is phenomenal to me. beautiful italian styling by michelotti a designer who penned cars for ferrari, lancia and maserati, a solid racing history, easy to service, corvette like independent suspension, lots of legroom (more than a tr6), low purchase price, racy looking optional hardtop… and that Jag xke like tilting bonnet! you can add modern rims to it to look cool or ad wire wheels and it’s a stunner. i’ve always liked british sports cars from the 60’s and 70’s and kept coming back to the spit…. i bought one two years ago. its a blast to drive. everyone shud have one.
Never had an MGA but I used an MGB as a daily driver in Panama in the early seventies. Carbs were terrible so had a manifold made and used the carb off a VW 1600. A little flat spot but worked pretty well and always started.
Then a marine driving around showing off for his hooker girlfriend was so occupied he rear ended me and totaled the car.
Dont see many MGAs about though Bs are still common here I fail to understand the unreliability aspect since these used the same mechanicals and electrics as the British sedans of the era which kept going well enough hell Ive got a cLucas ignition system outside that fires first shot, admittedly Rootes engines were far superior designs than BMC but the electrics are the same.
Never owned an MGA, but experience with a B and a TR3A tells me that a lot of the reliability issues (beyond Lucas Electrics) could be attributed to the unfamiliarity with British cars in America. In 1973, I didn’t know that DOT3 brake fluid was poison to my car’s brake seals, and neither did the guy at Generic Auto Parts. (If I had asked the guy at the local British Motors, maybe I would have learned, but I didn’t. oops.)
Beyond Lucas, the differences in design philosophy in auto electrics was profound. Two fuses in a Britcar versus half a dozen or more in a contemporary American car. This lead to my $5.00 headlight switch giving its life to protect the $0.30 fuse. I never had trouble with the electric overdrive, but was glad I didn’t have to mess with it. Oh yeah, the B was insistent on getting a tuneup every 10K miles. Stranded me once when I tried to stretch it. Swapped plugs to get home and did the rest, and it was happy.
Two carbs versus one, lever shocks versus tubes, and it all adds up.
(I still muse about an MGB with a Toyota 22R and 5 speed, but I’ll leave that for a LeMons racer…)
In terestingly we dropped into the local library this afternoon for my daughter I went to the magazine section and leafed thru the latest NZ Classic car mag Our leader of the opposition in paliament was featured with his unrestored daily driven MGA a white roadster. Funny too watchimg people do a double take walking past my Minx then going to read the registration label to see what it is Ive only fitted one badge it says Hillman on the boot lid the old car generates quite a bit of interest.
Well what do you know, a car I can comment on. I owned a 1961 MGA coupe from 1970 thru 1975. It was red with a red interior. It had knockoff wire wheels, and a 1600cc engine. And it was a troublemaker deluxe. The wood floor boards had to be replaced after I bought it, because if you lifted the floor mat you could watch the road go by just inches from your foot. The twin six volt batteries behind the seats were replaced with a 12 volt battery. The carbs were a huge pain to keep in synch and the wire wheels had to be trued about once a year. Even changing the oil was a huge undertaking. I was fortunate enough to know a Mercedes mechanic in a neighboring town and he did his best to keep it on the road. I enjoyed the car when it was running right and sold it for double what I paid for it. However, I would never buy another one. I enjoyed the write up.
I had a ’59 MGA back in the day, a previous owner had replaced the floor boards without including drain holes. I drilled in drain holes after I left the top down and it rained over night. I finally gave up on it after it began to catch on fire every time I turned the headlights on. Does this sound like a nightmare car that I hated and was glad to see the end of? Not at all, I loved it and if I could afford to own a pet car today I would have one on my short list.
Also: the ROTC dude “Neidermeyer” car in “Animal House”.
I think the MGA belonged to Greg Marmalard, Mandy Pepridge’s boyfriend. We never saw Neidermeyer’s car. Their nemisis, Eric Stratton, the president of Delta house, had a Corvette.
Saw an MGA dressed up as a racer at the Vintage races at COTA a few months ago. They’re sure beautiful cars to my eyes….although perhaps not the most effective race cars in their class.
Is it just me, or do the taillights on the FHC look exactly like the ones on a Jag XKSS?
A standard Lucas part.
Great article Paul. Have loved British sports cars since owning a 68 MGB. BTW, those cross flow heads are rare and expensive.
One of the main reasons why the prototype was canned was because it was powered by the pre-war XP engines.
Had MG (or more specifically BMC) been on the ball, the MGA’s B-Series would not only receive the 1.8 as found in the MGB (though only a 1.7 at most was actually considered around that time) but also feature a more potent 115-120+ hp 1.8 Twin-Cam variant.
That would have in-turn allowed the MGB to feature a 115+ hp 2-litre B-Series engine from the outset along with IRS.
The MGA, along with the Austin-Healey 3000, are what comes to my mind when I think of the quintessential British sports car, and I have great admiration for those who devote themselves to (and are successful at) keeping these cars running.
Can we call the MG A the first of MG’s Deadly Sins? There’s the under developed twin cam engine, wooden floor, the usual British electrical horror stories, an engine with pre WW 2 roots. And not as fast as it’s opposition.
If it were a GM product, that’s enough for DS status here. Rant over, I enjoyed the story.
The engine was the new post war B series nothing prewar about it it first appeared in the A40 sedans new in 48
On the “prewar roots” line, I was quoting PN. I did wonder, as I’d assumed the B engine was a 50s design.
The B-Series engine’s roots can be loosely traced to the 2nd generation 3.5-litre / 216 Chevrolet Straight-6 via the Austin 4/6-cylinder “D-Series” engines, with the A-Series engine itself being in some respects a downscaled B-Series unit.
However at least the B-Series had much development potential to be exploited, unlike the pre-war XP (XPAG / XPEG) engines that powered the rejected early-1950s MGA prototypes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevrolet_straight-6_engine#Second_generation
i know but chris… look how beautiful it is. i mean old ferarri’s aren’t known for great electrics either and they have been using Dino V8 engine up until the f430. these are cars not aimed at the same market as GM products.
Pretty much everything after the TD was a deadly sin, and the evidence is they’ve been dead for decades. Before that, they were a zombie company living off the English taxpayer. The MGB could perhaps be considered an exception, but it was overdue for replacement with something more modern by 1971. Keeping it around a decade too long was their last deadly sin.
Having owned and worked on many old British Cars (still have two in my yard now) I feel that the primary fault of the MGA/MGB was the almost total lack of concern to quality control in initial build quality ~ .
.
Millions of these cars (BMC products using the same running gear) were sold world wide and those who understood they’d need fettling and regular routine maintenance had good service from them and usually liked how they drove .
.
IMO BMC was like GM in the penny-pinching their products to death .
.
-Nate
The last few weeks we’ve had some serious rain here in the San Francisco area, so I was surprised to see an immaculate, top-down, BRG MGA approaching me in a heavy downpour last week. It did spot the half-tonneau cover in place over the passenger seat. Oddly enough, I saw the same car again a few hours later. It was still raining.
It’s funny, nobody in Britain had any trouble keeping these cars on the road. I suppose it’s because we were much poorer and had no choice but to fix them ourselves and share the knowledge about how to do so. They’re very simple mechanically and as most of us had progressed from mending bicycles to motorbikes then to cars it was just what you did, getting more tools as you went along. No one I knew could afford to pay someone to fix their car and it would have been considered unmanly to do so.
When I first started working in the early 70s my boss was a top level amateur MGB racer. He also built racing engines for MGBs to help pay for his habit. On his desk he had an interesting paperweight (remember those?). It was a mangled valve from an MGA twin cam. The shaft was actually bent almost into a corkscrew. It seems he had raced an MGA twin cam and had some a serious mechanical failure. I wish I had a picture.
In 1966, at age 18, I purchased a 1960 MGA roadster. It was red with a white racing stripe and knockoff wire wheels. Shortly after that I joined the Air Force. I was stationed at an airbase near Kansas City, Missouri. I drove the MGA from my home in Scranton, PA to Kansas City. I drove for 24 hours without a rest. The muffler was shot and that little 4 cylinder was extremely loud. When I finally got to the airbase, I couldn’t hear and my body was numb. I vowed I would never do that again. The car wouldn’t start when it was raining, so I kept a can of spray to remove moisture from the inside of my distributor cap. It was loads of fun to drive and I miss that car more than any other car I’ve ever owned.
Lewis ;
How is it that Brittany rules the waves yet her cars can’t go through puddles ? =8-)
-Nate