i dont need to lie about anything tbh non of you know f**k all about the mgf/tf models apart from quoting factory weight stats ect which are fine for a factory car with a standard engine. 4secs is optimistic but thats what i have been told to expect from various companies even better a mate of mine you has a less powerfull elise who is getting 4.8 fact is no matter how heavy the car is its power to weight ratio and my car after a few more bits and more time on the rr will be producing 10-30 more bhp or i can go nuts and get the turbo conversion done but the fact is 0-60 figures will always be in the 4sec's (or below with the turbo) from now on. even when it was running 190bhp it was in 5.5secs thats non s/c either I think the mgf is vastly underestimated which is good cos otherwise everyone would be driving them like the elise. once tuned and tweaked with the new subframes, suspension ect the car becomes compleatly diffrent, and more predictable than an elise Edited by: N1CK
F*ck it dude, looks f*cking ace! If I could afford one, and I probably could if the local scum would leave the hood alone. I'd f*cking love one. Nice to know you can TF the MGF.
i heard, through the grape vine that brand new 05 mgtf 160's (160bhp top of the range tf) are selling for9,999 due to the demise of MGR if you or anyone else wants one i'd buy one now people are selling 2month old tf's for 7k its crazy and sad really
ahhh so now you admit you were being economical with the turth to start with. why? just makes you look silly. all it wouldve taken is the word "estimated" in front of the 4.0 secs, then people could argue all they want but you wouldnt be getting such a ribbing. you said yourself your mate has an elise that does 4.8 secs to 60 with less power, but show me an mgf that weighs as little as an elise before I can see how that has anything to do with your car doing 60 in 4 secs! you said it yourself, power to weight. well I really cant see how an mgf that isnt just a spaceframe chassis with carbon panels can ever weigh the same as an elise. I do know about MGFs, i've been in one. torque making up for power to weight? power is derived from torque, and torque is multiplied by the gearing, which has to compensate for the weight of the car f1 cars have very little torque (relatively, a man who works for mclaren told me they tend to have about the same torque as a civic type-r!) but lots of bhp and ability to rev means the gearing can be so low that the torque at the wheels is phenomenal. of course, they can only achieve this with 18000 rpm and very little weight. neither of which any MGF has ever had.
p.s. have you got any interest in VWs at all? you seem to think they are all sh1t compared to your MG, so why post here?
yes i have owned plenty of vw's hence why i 1st started posting on this forum my bro still has his mk1 gti and my mother has a mk3 its just me without As for looking silly i dont think so, i said 4 secs and i'll stand by that thank you very much if its over 4.5 i'll put my hand up and feel silly! so what you've been in one big deal ive been in a diablo from bristol to oxford but it doesnt mean i know what its like to drive and how fast it actually is! i know the build quality is poo and it make a nice noise but thats about it
i've driven a 160bhp MG TF around knockhill circuit. apart from wheelspin in 3rd in the rain it was pretty uninspiring tbh
thats kind of what i was thinking about the MGF at the time but without the nice noise bit I was also thinking "what a tart" about my mate who thought he was soooo cool because his car was a 2 seater sportscar even though it didnt seem very fast to me I know enough to know I was right not to want one in the first place. And also enough to know that unless you've tripled the power output or halved the weight 4.0 secs is cloud cuckoo land.
having a 2 seater aint the cool part its how it drives not even an mgf driver knows what its like, mgf cup drivers on the other hand do as mine is basically the same as the cup
i wont denie it there's quite a few gays on the mg rover forum but then im sure theres a few thousand gays that drive vw aswell
OK, fair comment. So, back to earlier. Caterham Superlight R400 = 408 bhp/tonne N1CK's MGF = 240 bhp/tonne assuming the 218bhp you quoted earlier and 920kg (from the 150kg which I generously gave you off the kerb weight and which you have not disputed) Even adding another 30bhp still only gives 270 bhp/tonne. So as you say, it's about power to weight, but even if you add another 30bhp you are still giving 138bhp/tonne away to a car that is only 1/10 of a second quicker to 60 than you claim yours is going to be. Like has been said you are making yourself look like a prat by posting BS. Think of MK2Jettagod or whatever his name was.
