mg tf

MK2/2.5 MX5 is better looking than a MGF/TF and the interior doesn't feel like it will fall apart in your hands. I cringed when opening and closing the door on a brandnew TF.

However F/TF's are a lot cheaper than the MX5 equivellent.
 
My parents have one (TF 160). Goes fast, hard suspension, standard Rover interior, don't trust it in the bends, looks pretty good. No reliability issues.
 
Capt Doufos said:
MK2/2.5 MX5 is better looking than a MGF/TF and the interior doesn't feel like it will fall apart in your hands. I cringed when opening and closing the door on a brandnew TF.

However F/TF's are a lot cheaper than the MX5 equivellent.
Click to expand...

Better looking?

Personal taste I suppose but I think the TF is a lot better looking than the MX5. The MX5 is just too Japanese, bland and 'blobby' for me :)

I'm not saying that the interior in the TF is perfect, but I was quite shocked at the interior in the Mk2 MX5. The door cards were one piece cheap shiny plastic, the dash was awful to look at and cheap, the buttons were particuarly nasty. It didn't feel sporty at all. Cheap nasty seat fabric too

Compared to the TF, with brushed aluminum gear knobs and surrounds, soft touch plastics, alcatera on the door cards, half leather/alcatera sports seats there's no comparison
 
What about the horrible little bits of plastic in the TF, I seem to remember vanity mirror covers that where the thinest plastic ever encoutered by man.

The MX5 also has a lot more useable boot space :)
 
Capt Doufos said:
What about the horrible little bits of plastic in the TF, I seem to remember vanity mirror covers that where the thinest plastic ever encoutered by man.

The MX5 also has a lot more useable boot space :)
Click to expand...

I agree about those covers - they are awful but thankfully you can just ignore them. The shiny indicator stalks and silver plastic heater knobs aren't great either

As I said, it's not great, but it's still a lot better than the MX5 :)

The MX5 is front engined so that'll free up a lot of boot space straight off
 
Capt Doufos said:
MX5 also has a lot more useable boot space :)
Click to expand...

Gotta disagree with that, its about as deep as my pockets which..arent very deep TBH! yeah it goes in a fair way but my mate couldnt even get his tent in his when he went camping, also it has the spare wheel and i think the battery are in there and take up lots of room.

On topic, I have an MGF 1.8i and its great, no leaks (at least with the soft top..the hard top is a different story), goes very well and is actually pretty good on petrol. Build quality is actuallay better than people make out and as said the interior is quite modern and comfotable. You do sit quite high up considering that its a low sports car, higher than in the MX-5 but this isnt really much of an issue. HGF is generally down to poor maintenance and how the car is treated, keep an eye on the coolant levels and find the cause of any loss ASAP, wekest points seem to be the underbody coolant pipes which run from the engin to the radiator at the front as they corrode badly and start to leak, also the expansion tank cap can somtimes lose its ability to with stand the pressure but can be replaved for less than £5.

Have to say i tried the MX-5 (Mk1 1.6) and the MGF and prefered the MGF but i really dont think theres that much in it, not had the chance to take my mate on in his 5 round a track but would be interesting to see how well they both handle.

NS
 
We can get two suitcases, or my other halfs Accordion and her music bag / stand or 3 25kg bags of plaster in the boot of the 5. The battery is below the floor so doesn't eat space. The Mk2's is a fair bit larger than a Mk1.

When we were looking the boot size/shape was important, and there is no way the accordion would have gone in the MGTF.

Which 1.6 did you try? some of the Mk1's are only 80Bhp as the UK ones got ristricted. My Mk2 is 146Bhp so there is a HUGE Difference.
 
Last edited:
Capt Doufos said:
We can get two suitcases, or my other halfs Accordion and her music bag / stand or 3 25kg bags of plaster in the boot of the 5. The battery is below the floor so doesn't eat space. The Mk2's is a fair bit larger than a Mk1.

When we were looking the boot size/shape was important, and there is no way the accordion would have gone in the MGTF.

Which 1.6 did you try? some of the Mk1's are only 80Bhp as the UK ones got ristricted. My Mk2 is 146Bhp so there is a HUGE Difference.
Click to expand...

Ahh, it all becomes clear, i didnt realise how much bigger they had made the boots on the Mk2, will have to check that out next time im a a meet with him. Mate has a Eunos 1.6 so its not restricted, its not bad but didnt have that thump i get from the f when i planted my foot, safe to say the mk2 probably is more like the f, still prefer the MGF/TF though, specially the trophy varients :D

NS
 
the vvt F is quicker to 60 I think 0-60 in 7.5 whereas the 1.8 5 is 8is I think. Not sure what the spec for the svt mx5-5 is though (if any faster at all)o

edit* just looked the SVT MX5 is 7.7s and the normal 1.8 is 8.2, so both cars are pretty much the same in that respect,
 
Last edited:
The TF is a great car, much "prettier" than the MX-5 imo and if it's not a base spec one they're actually nice places to sit, especially with the half leather half alcantara interior. The 80th anniversary ones are the pick of the bunch, but are obviously more expensive and you can get a similarly specced one for much cheaper. It is fast enough and handles very well and is a hoot to drive. Sure the MX-5 is meant to be a better drive, but you're not going to be constantly throwing it into bends on the way to the shops. I managed to fit a £150 supermarket shop into a TF, so there is quite a bit of space, but the front boot is of limited use if there is a spare wheel in there rather than the rubber repair kit.

If you're buying it for your wife, she will love it, and will probably like the looks of it more than the MX-5. Unless she is a real racer, I doubt she'd drive it to its full potential anyway. That's if she ever gets to drive it, I'm sure you'll be fighting over the keys in no time.

As far as reliability goes, the later models (03/04+) are more reliable, with slight engine modifications to stop the dreaded HGF. Servicing and parts are still not a problem, JCB own the rover spare parts network, and former MGR dealerships will still service the cars. Anyway, the TF is recommencing production pretty soon, so there shouldn't be a shortage.

The 1.6 engine is a bit gutless as far as I can tell, the 1.8 135 variant is fast enough for some engaging drives around the local back roads, with the 160 probably being the pick of the bunch.
 
I'm sure you all know my feelings on the subject, tested them all and the MX5 won hands down, whilst the TF does look nicer on the outside (love that blue) but the dash and plastics used look horrid the dash is cheap as is the switches, the mx has a nice soft touch dash / good quality plastics and switches that will actually last.
 
Just took my friends new MG TF out for a spin. What a joy to drive, very very nippy. Handling is awsome! i want one now.

Yes fair enough the mx5 might have slighly nicer dash etc but is it worth the few grand extra. Personally i think the exterior on the MG is nicer and with it being a few grand cheaper than the mx5 varient, the MG wins hands down for me.

Now to sell my car, and find an MG :)

ae_3.JPG


d8_3.JPG


4a_3.JPG


hmm yes please
 
The main problem is the MG is such good value for money ppl find it hard to see why they should pay more for the same age / or even older mx5 when they can get such a new TF for very little money, prices reflect the market and how buyers feel about the car, the mx5 prices are high for a reason (they are in high demand).

The tf should do you fine tbh have fun in it but for me it was well under par and the last car on my list, MX5 > MR2 > TF > MGF.
 
What exactly makes the MGF such a bad car? ignoring the fact that its Rover and K series engine that is. It handles well and goes well enough when accelerating, can someone please explain to me why the 5 is supposedly so much better? i dont get it, ive driven both and for me there wasnt much in it?

NS
 
The only way you will find out is if you go and test drive both, after doing so me and Firestar_3x decided the MX5 is the one to have, but it's all personal preferance some people for whatever reason will prefer the MG, but I would have an MX5 every time.

Also remember 5's hold their value a lot better, in a lot of cases a G/H plate MX-5 in top condition will cost you more than a R/S MGF.
 
Last edited:
NightShadow said:
What exactly makes the MGF such a bad car? ignoring the fact that its Rover and K series engine that is. It handles well and goes well enough when accelerating, can someone please explain to me why the 5 is supposedly so much better? i dont get it, ive driven both and for me there wasnt much in it?

NS
Click to expand...
Nowt wrong with the K engine.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom