Why are MGF's worth so little?
Discussion
I am currently selling my MGF on eBay and can't believe how little these cars are making. There are not alot of other cars that you can buy for less money with MOT's, and definately no convertibles!
Why are they worth so little? If i did'nt need to sell mine i wouldn't, but they are a hell of a lot of car for the money!
Why are they worth so little? If i did'nt need to sell mine i wouldn't, but they are a hell of a lot of car for the money!
AceOfHearts said:
I am currently selling my MGF on eBay and can't believe how little these cars are making. There are not alot of other cars that you can buy for less money with MOT's, and definately no convertibles!
Why are they worth so little? If i did'nt need to sell mine i wouldn't, but they are a hell of a lot of car for the money!
Is that true. Mk1 MX5's are cheap. I think you could get one with an MOT for £700. Why are they worth so little? If i did'nt need to sell mine i wouldn't, but they are a hell of a lot of car for the money!
I have one and i have to admit it can bit a bit scary, I wouldn't class it as a drivers car, more a mini cruiser.
I think that as a lot of people class it as a womens car due to the compact driving position makes it a very niche market.
but i have a miltek exhaust on mine and i can honestly say it is the sweetest sounding car oi have owned.
I think that as a lot of people class it as a womens car due to the compact driving position makes it a very niche market.
but i have a miltek exhaust on mine and i can honestly say it is the sweetest sounding car oi have owned.
Edited by The Spruce goose on Sunday 26th February 17:25
Because as much as I like them they have no real benefits over an MX5 they can't even claim not to rust although it probably isn't as bad as a 5.
But the engine while nice to drive is a massive downside as you run a risk of it going pop and it's in a bloody awful location to resolve when it does.
Coupled with a couple of other common issues an MX5 doesn't have and all of a sudden it becomes surprising they aren't further behind in value.
But the engine while nice to drive is a massive downside as you run a risk of it going pop and it's in a bloody awful location to resolve when it does.
Coupled with a couple of other common issues an MX5 doesn't have and all of a sudden it becomes surprising they aren't further behind in value.
The MG has one main fault. The K series engine.
Made worse by the location at the rear which is very tight and very poor from a cooling point of location.
Which with the ability of the K series to overheat and blow head gaskets is double jeopardy at its worst.
Glad you sold the car.
I would avoid the K series except the lower size engines.
Made worse by the location at the rear which is very tight and very poor from a cooling point of location.
Which with the ability of the K series to overheat and blow head gaskets is double jeopardy at its worst.
Glad you sold the car.
I would avoid the K series except the lower size engines.
They'll be cheap for the foreseeable future IMO, there are just too many of them out there still and they're at that awkward banger/modern classic age. Give it 5/10 years and prices will be a higher - but by how much I don't know.
The problem with the MGF is that it needs a bit of looking after, if the suspension is let go too low and the tyres are crap (as they are on most F's) the car will drive like a bag of s
te. A well maintained and lightly modified one will be a fantastic car, mine certainly is.
5paul5 said:
Would imagine its because one of its rivals the Mazda MX5 is a far better car.
Not really.The problem with the MGF is that it needs a bit of looking after, if the suspension is let go too low and the tyres are crap (as they are on most F's) the car will drive like a bag of s
te. A well maintained and lightly modified one will be a fantastic car, mine certainly is.I don't know if the problem is contained to F's.
Not long ago I missed an opportunity to buy a mint Eunos for £1750. The bad points of the car were: it was a Eunos, and it came with little history.
The good points were that it was an '89 1600, and was in absolutely mint condition. I forget the mileage now but it was not high, but I spent time giving the car a good looking over and it was in fabulous condition.
£5k only gets you a very ordinary MGB these days, and I know which I'd prefer to drive.
Not long ago I missed an opportunity to buy a mint Eunos for £1750. The bad points of the car were: it was a Eunos, and it came with little history.
The good points were that it was an '89 1600, and was in absolutely mint condition. I forget the mileage now but it was not high, but I spent time giving the car a good looking over and it was in fabulous condition.
£5k only gets you a very ordinary MGB these days, and I know which I'd prefer to drive.
AceOfHearts said:
I would say that the engine was one of the best bits of the car! I have a new respect for the K series and it suited the car well.
The K series can be a very high output engine. But cross bolting and an alloy block/head/etc on a production engine was always a bridge too far for Rover.
Putting an engine that was very suspect in overheating easily, in the rear of the car, was exactly the same error that Rootes made with the Hillman Imp.
Sadly the engineers at Rover ignored that example. Hence the results.
Both the Coventry Climax Imp engine and the K series were capable of excellent performance.
Just totally unsuited to the applications Rootes and Rover used them for in rear engine cars.
Not surprisingly Rover and Rootes ceased trading. Entirely deservedly.
Steffan said:
But cross bolting and an alloy block/head/etc on a production engine was always a bridge too far for Rover.
Putting an engine that was very suspect in overheating easily, in the rear of the car, was exactly the same error that Rootes made with the Hillman Imp.
Sadly the engineers at Rover ignored that example. Hence the results.
What do you mean by cross bolting? There are only the long head bolts. And an alloy block & head is pretty common these days!Putting an engine that was very suspect in overheating easily, in the rear of the car, was exactly the same error that Rootes made with the Hillman Imp.
Sadly the engineers at Rover ignored that example. Hence the results.
People talk about the K-Series like it's a grenade, it doesn't overheat at random or anything. Fix some of the silly things like the thermostat being on the inlet side of the engine with a remote thermostat, put the latest MLS gasket & LR oil rail on and you should have little or no trouble.
Edited by Eunos on Friday 2nd March 10:29
Eunos said:
Steffan said:
But cross bolting and an alloy block/head/etc on a production engine was always a bridge too far for Rover.
Putting an engine that was very suspect in overheating easily, in the rear of the car, was exactly the same error that Rootes made with the Hillman Imp.
Sadly the engineers at Rover ignored that example. Hence the results.
What do you mean by cross bolting? There are only the long head bolts. And an alloy block & head is pretty common these days!Putting an engine that was very suspect in overheating easily, in the rear of the car, was exactly the same error that Rootes made with the Hillman Imp.
Sadly the engineers at Rover ignored that example. Hence the results.
People talk about the K-Series like it's a grenade, it doesn't overheat at random or anything. Fix some of the silly things like the thermostat being on the inlet side of the engine with a remote thermostat, put the latest MLS gasket & LR oil rail on and you should have little or no trouble.
Edited by Eunos on Friday 2nd March 10:29
The fundamental problems inherent in the design are twofold.
Firstly the long bolts holding the engine together are not sufficiently robust to prevent gradual stretching in the bolts which puts head gaskets under pressure. That was always an risky set up in a production engine where tolerances would vary in the relatively uncontrolled assembly lines in a car factory.
Secondly the fixing of the liners in the block on the larger engines was ineffective from the start as the article below confirms in some detail.
" The K series engine produced by Rover, revolutionary in that it was the first volume production implementation of the low pressure sand casting technique. This works by injecting liquid aluminium into an upturned sand mould from below. In this way any oxide film always remains on the surface of the casting and is not stirred into the casting structure.
This production technology overcame many of the inherent problems of casting aluminium components and consequently permitted lower casting wall thickness and higher strength to weight ratios. However, the process required the use of heat treated LM25 material which gave the engines a reputation for being fragile. An engine overheat would often result in the material becoming annealed and rendering the components scrap.
The aluminium engine blocks were fitted with spun cast iron cylinder liners that were initially manufactured by GKN's Sheepbridge Stokes of Chesterfield, but replaced by spun cast iron liners made by Goetze after some seminal research conducted by Charles Bernstein at Longbridge, which proved influential even to Ducati for their race engines.
Unfortunately a large number of aftermarket engines, the so-called "VHPD"s" were built with the old substandard GKNs by Minister, Lotus and PTP well after the Goetze liner's introduction to the production line in 2000."
I think that pretty well confirms my opinion.
The K series was fundamentally flawed from the start. It got better towards the end but is still, a very fragile production engine.
Eunos said:
What do you mean by cross bolting? There are only the long head bolts. And an alloy block & head is pretty common these days!
People talk about the K-Series like it's a grenade, it doesn't overheat at random or anything. Fix some of the silly things like the thermostat being on the inlet side of the engine with a remote thermostat, put the latest MLS gasket & LR oil rail on and you should have little or no trouble.
People talk about the K-Series like it's a grenade, it doesn't overheat at random or anything. Fix some of the silly things like the thermostat being on the inlet side of the engine with a remote thermostat, put the latest MLS gasket & LR oil rail on and you should have little or no trouble.
Edited by Eunos on Friday 2nd March 10:29
basics really.
Multi-layer gasket. Decent radiator. Some new hoses. Serviced well. Plenty of cold air in at the business end. Decent condition exhaust at the other.
Personally run a K series for 90k miles in 3 years, on the same head gasket.
Admitedly it ate cam belts at a 30k rate
I think the real answer here is that with the K series it depends on the particular engine.
Clearly there are K series that run well.
But if you get a bad one they are disastrously unreliable.
Compare this to the Toyota engine in the MR2 or the Mazda engine in the MX5
Simply more reliable production engines.
Clearly there are K series that run well.
But if you get a bad one they are disastrously unreliable.
Compare this to the Toyota engine in the MR2 or the Mazda engine in the MX5
Simply more reliable production engines.
Steffan said:
Errr, it's not a bad read but that article confirms nothing about the actual fixing of the liners? It states that there were sub standard liners used which were then changed to the Goetze ones, which happened early in the engines life. The fixing of the liners themselves is fine, they're clamped down by the head after all so they won't be going anywhere... The head bolts are also pretty much a non issue IMO.
The K-Series is a reliable engine if kept in good fettle, strong bottom end and apart from being tarred with the big HGF brush there is little else that goes wrong with them.
Steffan said:
I think the real answer here is that with the K series it depends on the particular engine.
Clearly there are K series that run well.
But if you get a bad one they are disastrously unreliable.
I agreeClearly there are K series that run well.
But if you get a bad one they are disastrously unreliable.
We've had 3 1.4 Rover's as company car's ... 1st car had no engine prob's, 2nd HGF at 58,000 miles & 3rd MAJOR engine failure at 55,000 miles
AceOfHearts said:
I am currently selling my MGF on eBay and can't believe how little these cars are making. There are not alot of other cars that you can buy for less money with MOT's, and definately no convertibles!
Why are they worth so little? If i did'nt need to sell mine i wouldn't, but they are a hell of a lot of car for the money!
Two words: supply + demand!Why are they worth so little? If i did'nt need to sell mine i wouldn't, but they are a hell of a lot of car for the money!
wmo418 said:
AceOfHearts said:
I am currently selling my MGF on eBay and can't believe how little these cars are making. There are not alot of other cars that you can buy for less money with MOT's, and definately no convertibles!
Why are they worth so little? If i did'nt need to sell mine i wouldn't, but they are a hell of a lot of car for the money!
Two words: supply + demand!Why are they worth so little? If i did'nt need to sell mine i wouldn't, but they are a hell of a lot of car for the money!
wana draw an aggregate demand/aggregate supply diagram to show your point!
Gassing Station | MG | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff