MoreSupport for the MG-B V8

Browse pages
Current page

1

Current page

2

Current page

3

Current page

4

Current page

5

Current page

6

Current page

7

Current page

8

Current page

9

Current page

10

Current page

11

Current page

12

Current page

13

Current page

14

Current page

15

Current page

16

Current page

17

Current page

18

Current page

19

Current page

20

Current page

21

Current page

22

Current page

23

Current page

24

Current page

25

Current page

26

Current page

27

Current page

28

Current page

29

Current page

30

Current page

31

Current page

32

Current page

33

Current page

34

Current page

35

Current page

36

Current page

37

Current page

38

Current page

39

Current page

40

Current page

41

Current page

42

Current page

43

Current page

44

Current page

45

Current page

46

Current page

47

Current page

48

Current page

49

Current page

50

Current page

51

Current page

52

Current page

53

Current page

54

Current page

55

Current page

56

Current page

57

Current page

58

Current page

59

Current page

60

Current page

61

Current page

62

Current page

63

Current page

64

Current page

65

Current page

66

Current page

67

Current page

68

Current page

69

Current page

70

Current page

71

Current page

72

Current page

73

Current page

74

Current page

75

Current page

76

Current page

77

Current page

78

Current page

79

Current page

80

Current page

81

Current page

82

Current page

83

Current page

84

Current page

85

Current page

86

Current page

87

Current page

88

Current page

89

Current page

90

Current page

91

Current page

92

Current page

93

Current page

94

Current page

95

Current page

96

Current page

97

Current page

98

Current page

99

Current page

100

Sir,

I was delighted to read in your November edition of the spirited defence by Mr. Stephen Dear of the MG-B V8. Having read the quite savage comments on this motor car in another journal, I can hardly believe their testers have had out on the road the same V8 as I find it so worthwhile to run.

Having had a succession of eight Jaguars, including two XJ6s, a V 12 E-type, and an XJ12, I am able to make some reasonably valid comment on, for instance, noise, per, fomiance, and road-holding. Performance is not quite up to E-type or XJ12 standards, though it is not far behind the latter in straight-line acceleration; road-holding is not in the Xj class but one has fewer misgivings than with the E-type; whilst I am astounded at the criticisms about wind noise. As a classical music enthusiast I can tell you that at 90 m.p.h. (I do much motoring abroad) one can hear quiet solo instrument passages with perfect comfort. I suggest that those who complain about excessive wind noise must have door beading, or something similar, adrift. The one substantial criticism one must accept is that of the ride. On poor surfaces one has to admit it is a bit of a “bone-shaker”.

What is quite astounding to me, after the unquenchable thirst of the Jaguar, is fuel economy. Petrol consumption for my 3,000-plus miles per month averages 26-27 m.p.g.

I ought to say that my model is now 18 months old, so I do not have the new “highride” version. Whether that extra two inches off the ground makes a major difference to roadworthiness, I cannot judge. Certainly I would not go for the new styling, which is, I think, quite hideous. ,But as a true GT for a 6 ft. 4 in., 14-stone driver, plus wife, golf clubs, and luggage, I really think this car has much to commend it. Give the car a new suspension system, re-style the bumpers, tart up the facia, and you would have a very exceptional motor.

PETER HOSKINS Church Brampton, Northants.

[Certainly the MG-B V8 test-car supplied to us had a most diabolical wind-noise problem without evidence of loose door seals. Perhaps British Leyland have since cured the complaint, or the car they supplied to us and other magazines was a rogue—in which case, more fool them.—C.R.]