MG-Rover.org Forums banner

1 - 20 of 91 Posts

·
Registered
mg_zs
Joined
·
3,368 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
just thought i would see what people think is wrong with the mg6 and if they think saic's stratagy for the company is the right way to go.
personally i can't see anything i dislike about the mg6. the only thing that bugs me is the time between it going on sale here compared with china ,
by the time we get them in the dealers it will have been nearly a year since it will have been on sale in china.
as for saic and thier stratagy ,it seems to me that they being very thorough.
the only problem i can see is the n-series is not as efficient as newer engines .are they developing a replacement??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,543 Posts
just thought i would see what people think is wrong with the mg6 and if they think saic's stratagy for the company is the right way to go.
personally i can't see anything i dislike about the mg6. the only thing that bugs me is the time between it going on sale here compared with china ,
by the time we get them in the dealers it will have been nearly a year since it will have been on sale in china.
as for saic and thier stratagy ,it seems to me that they being very thorough.
the only problem i can see is the n-series is not as efficient as newer engines .are they developing a replacement??
It was obvious they were going to get their own country in order first. It gives them a chance to get established as MG wasn't known over there and it also gives them important sales to make some money for entry into other markets and further developments.

I think they will have all sorts of things in development.
 

·
Window Licker
Joined
·
22,048 Posts
just thought i would see what people think is wrong with the mg6
This is my opinion, cut me down all you like but having reviewed the available photos of it more times than my eyes can take and this is what I think is the main problem with the MG6:

It's ugly as hell.

Seriously.

The front end isn't too bad but look at the rest of it. Friday afternoon design at its finest.

The back end looks like they just couldn't be bothered. It looks like they tweaked the back end of the old ugly Toyota Corrolla and said "That'll have to do". It'll certainly blend into the background, there's no doubt about that. It'll drive past and I doubt I'll even notice it other than to shake my head every time one goes past.

MG's are supposed to have some road presence.

This thing wont have any at all and I was hopeing for something a little more in keeping with the MG badge.

This creation should be wearing the badge of a cheap far east manufacturer like Proton, not dragging the MG badge down to that level.

If this is all they can come up with then it's a real shame. I'd wager if you gave a chimp a pencil for a few hours it could come up with a design that better suited the history of the badge.

There you have it. Shoot me down all you like but that's the main thing I think is wrong with the MG6.
 

·
Registered
other_rover
Joined
·
8,737 Posts
There's nothing wrong with the MG6 except that it just feels off the pace in a few areas.

For example the interior looks well designed but some of the plastics and the execution of a couple of things just aren't quite right. It's like they have got the interior to be one step up from a Ssangyong but 1 step behind a Vauxhall.

With the exterior the design is OK but for many MG fans's it's too like a Nissan Primera. There's not enough presence.

To be truthfull I see it as a fantastic first effort, but I'd struggle to really want one over a Honda for example.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,025 Posts
I find it amusing all the people saying they don't like the look of the MG6 because it looks like a Nissan/Proton etc. Especially the ones who own a ZS which is EXACTLY THE SAME as the old old old Civic! Go figure! I don't think anyone could argue that the 400 was particularly nice even at launch and just fell further off the pace over the years. And yet here we are.
 

·
Registered
'06 MG ZR +120 (HQM) '04 MG ZR 105 (IAB)
Joined
·
9,064 Posts
Bearing in mind that the new MGs have been designed/engineered by pretty much the same people who designed the 25/ZR, 45/ZS, 75/ZT and F/TF and who were or would have been working on replacements for those cars when MGR went under, I think it is reasonable to assume that this car is RDX60 or at least a follow on from that design program and is broadly the same car that would have appeared had MGR not gone bust.

I therefore find it difficult to understand why so many people, who 5 years ago were working themselves into a lather of excitement about the design proposals for RDX60 which were emerging from the defunct Longbridge, are now being so very negative about the MG6.

To have a future, MG Motor have to appeal to the mainstream, and whilst that may not be to the liking of those who are still trapped in the time warp of MG being purely sports cars, I am afraid that an out and out sporty range of cars would not have a wide enough range of appeal to be viable. MG isn't a Porsche or (dare I say it?) BMW. MG isn't even an Alfa Romeo. They need mainstream cars first and foremost, and all the negative comments comparing it to other mainstream cars indicate to me that the design team have probably got it about right.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,229 Posts
Haven't heard about the K*cough*N-series being uprated in the head department, has anyone?

Toyota used the design of the K series ( partly ) but on some models gave it fully electronically variable valve timing with lift control ( vvtl-i )

A nice shiny new head with all the trimmings to smoothen out and power up the engine in the low revs would be nice ( seems they went the turbo route instead )

With the turbo charger they are using in addition it could make a massively sporty car no?

Maybe I'm just hoping deep down that MG will get back into touring cars and blast the field away :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,194 Posts
It is what it is.. a good base for building a business. Its a good looking car, has a well known badge and will be competitivly priced. Instead of marketing the car to compete with BMW and Ford if they aim for the guys with slightly less money they are sure to build up a good buyer base.

The most important thing now is for them to keep in the game!

And get rid of that Engine in favour of one with a new image!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
14,111 Posts
it needs a diesel engine with at least... 180bhp? :dunno:

then I'll be happy :D
Benny is on it there.

They should have let a Brit or an Italian design it.

Big alloys

However, the MG badge still carrys kudos, so they have something to work with. And it was good to hear that the steering is hydraulic and not electric. Seat lent me a new Leon and that had electric power steering. Wasnt a bad handling car, but it did feel odd and a bit numb. For the sake of a few % energy saving its not worth it imho.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,413 Posts
I therefore find it difficult to understand why so many people, who 5 years ago were working themselves into a lather of excitement about the design proposals for RDX60 which were emerging from the defunct Longbridge, are now being so very negative about the MG6.
Thats probably the point! The MG6 is probably close to the car design that we all expected RD60 to be in 2002/3/4/5 or whatever year we all deluded ourselves in believing it would be launched.

It's now 2010 and will be 2011 when this car finally get's on UK roads. Like pretty much every car to come out of Rover/Austin etc in the last 40 years, it's already about 5-8 years off pace before it even gets started.

Had I seen the MG6 in 2002, chances are I would have been at the front of the queue. Not so in 2011 when there are other choices...
 

·
Registered
cityrover
Joined
·
4,366 Posts
Thats probably the point! The MG6 is probably close to the car design that we all expected RD60 to be in 2002/3/4/5 or whatever year we all deluded ourselves in believing it would be launched.

It's now 2010 and will be 2011 when this car finally get's on UK roads. Like pretty much every car to come out of Rover/Austin etc in the last 40 years, it's already about 5-8 years off pace before it even gets started.

Had I seen the MG6 in 2002, chances are I would have been at the front of the queue. Not so in 2011 when there are other choices...
I think you're lagging behind the latest car trends..if you look at the latest Audis and BMWs you will see MG6 design cues - who copied who I don't know.

But thank God it is another arthritic honda rehash with a new bumper. And I was hoping for RDX60 to be TCV like - sadly disappointed on that front so far I grant you

I don't believe it is off pace at all in fact I would say it is quite bang on!

spin this around....http://www.audi.co.uk/new-cars/a5/a5-sportback.html
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24,543 Posts
Fair point, can't stop the connotations that will come to many people's minds if they find out it's basically the same engine that wasn't exactly known as reliable
It was a fairly simple fix that MG Rover knew about but didn't do.

SAIC has made several improvements on the N Series, as well as new variants 1.8VVT(Dual Variable Valve Timing which is not the same as the old VVC), 1.5, 1.5T.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,229 Posts
It was a fairly simple fix that MG Rover knew about but didn't do.

SAIC has made several improvements on the N Series, as well as new variants 1.8VVT(Dual Variable Valve Timing which is not the same as the old VVC), 1.5, 1.5T.
Ah, that's sure more like it :)
A nice punchy common rail turbo diesel, 1.5 n/a + turbo and 1.8 dual vvt sounds just what the car needs to appeal to most people.. and me
I may well get that 1.8 some day if I can afford it :D
 
1 - 20 of 91 Posts
Top