http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/upload/23050/images/001MG6scoop.jpg

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/upload/23050/images/MGR1.jpg

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/upload/23050/images/MGR4.jpg

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/upload/23050/images/MGR5.jpg

The saloon version of the MG6 in my opinion looks better than the fastback version

lol did you just happen to see them in an Asda carpark then?

I agree the saloon looks better than the fastback version. It'd be nice to think that it could compete with the likes of the Ford Mondeo and VW Passat etc etc... As long as they bring out some really beefy versions ;)

Really like the saloon version.. If it came with a V6 I would be tempted!!

I notice that car has Apex alloys fitted.

Nick.

oh thats weird theyre in ASDA! lol

Saloon is a Roewe 550 with MG6 nose added.

Looks like SAIC inherited good old British badge engineering!

Saloon is a Roewe 550 with MG6 nose added.

Looks like SAIC inherited good old British badge engineering!

The saloon is a test car. It is not the real MG6 saloon.

Ride height and alloys fitted! These MG's are starting to look a little more acceptable :)

Have to say that does look really good!

Like both of them am I alone in thinking the back of the saloon looks like a BMW?
When a diesel comes out i'll be down there seeing what kind of deal I can get though, might be a while though.

Saloon is a Roewe 550 with MG6 nose added.

Looks like SAIC inherited good old British badge engineering!

Like both of them am I alone in thinking the back of the saloon looks like a BMW?so I presume you are saying the back of a Roewe 550 looks like a B*W...

if they keep the saloon looking fairly close to that i might be tempted by it rather than the mg3. unusual for me as i usually prefer hatch's

Good photos:)

The saloon does look good.

That slate grey really suits the car. I think the 550 rear and MG6 front work better together as a complete car than the standard 550 and MG6. It looks very smart and a bit more complete somehow.

i much prefer the hatchback tbh the boot looks a lot sharper.

The engineers just thought they take them out for a little spin and get some lunch did they?? :)

I really am starting to like them both,

I think the hatch would look great with out that rear wiper.

I think the hatch would look great with out that rear wiper.
But then how would you clear the rear window if you needed too?

And why does the saloon not have one?

Its taken straight of a R200/25 it looks old and dated.

If they replaced it with a modern looking one it would be fine.

Little details...

The saloon is a test car. It is not the real MG6 saloon.

Do you know that for certain? Given the that 550 wont be sold in the UK i dont see any real reason for them to make sheet metal changes at the rear of the saloon. We might see the lights and detail trim change but not much else i expect.

You can get a nice extreme spoiler on the back of that.......

i like the sedan, starting to look good tho would still go for the fastback version myself

Do you know that for certain? Given the that 550 wont be sold in the UK i dont see any real reason for them to make sheet metal changes at the rear of the saloon. We might see the lights and detail trim change but not much else i expect.

i'd think it'd be just a diffent bumper and rear lights to match those on the fastback. a differnt boot lid would be at a push.

Now that is looking nice, sporty and classy. DROOL!

i like the sedan, starting to look good tho would still go for the fastback version myself



i'd think it'd be just a diffent bumper and rear lights to match those on the fastback. a differnt boot lid would be at a push.

I don't think there's any need to change the rear lights or bumper as the whole design hangs together remarkably well. They really do need to be thinking about a HOT version though. I know the big numbers come from small petrol and diesel engines but to make the brand credible as a sporting name they really will need a "halo" model.

Nice. I can actually see the 75 in the sedan, esp in rear 3/4 view

so I presume you are saying the back of a Roewe 550 looks like a B*W...
Um yes but that could be because most cars with the creases have followed a trend but still nice though, anyone know of the progress on the diesel version?

Um yes but that could be because most cars with the creases have followed a trend but still nice though, anyone know of the progress on the diesel version?
Diesel version to follow 12 months after UK launch by all accounts.
Simon

Diesel version to follow 12 months after UK launch by all accounts.
Simon

Yes. And all-new...

The Saloon rear lights look similar to the New Mk6 ASTRA !!!

Yes. And all-new...
D1.9TCI – Common rail direct injection

...

I see there is a 1.6 comming too, and a 1.4 for the MG Zero...

D1.9TCI – Common rail direct injection

...

I see there is a 1.6 comming too, and a 1.4 for the MG Zero...
The news about AP11(350) platform released by SAIC lately confirm some engines and gearboxes.
http://img.xgo-img.com.cn/330_500x279/329991.jpg

The news about AP11(350) platform released by SAIC lately confirm some engines and gearboxes.

Note that the 2.0Turbo NLE is also listed there - ideal for the MG6 :)

And good to see the petrol direct injection version of the 1.5 NSE on the way.

Regarding the diesel engine I suppose the relationship with Fiat might bring the Fiat 1.9 multijet over which would be nice mappable to 215bhp maybe just maybe.

Note that the 2.0Turbo NLE is also listed there - ideal for the MG6 :)

And good to see the petrol direct injection version of the 1.5 NSE on the way.

Is that 2.0t a petrol unit? If so it would be nice to see power outputs north of 200bhp. BEaring in mind that current 2.0t engines from other manufacturers are pumping out more than 250bhp I'm hoping this is a seriously powerful unit and the basis for the "Xpower" version.

But then how would you clear the rear window if you needed too?

Didn't seem to bother SD1 drivers 30 years ago :P

You can get a nice extreme spoiler on the back of that.......


hmmm modding allready maybe a xpower version will eventually surface with set spoiler and other various visual and mechanical niceties looks good though imho not that i can say much having just destroyed my zr but id buy the saloon car as my dailey driver and keep the zr as the weapon http://forums.mg-rover.org/images/icons/icon10.gif

Phew... I just puffed out a HUGE sigh of relief. The saloon looks a MILLION times better than the hatchback. Hurrah! :broon:

Edit: What... No chrome door handles?

Is that 2.0t a petrol unit? If so it would be nice to see power outputs north of 200bhp. BEaring in mind that current 2.0t engines from other manufacturers are pumping out more than 250bhp I'm hoping this is a seriously powerful unit and the basis for the "Xpower" version.
Yes, that is what it says on the image ;)

Saloon is a Roewe 550 with MG6 nose added.

Looks like SAIC inherited good old British badge engineering!

I like them both, lookswise i think they are great, spot on. :)
Will the Roewe be coming to the U.K.
Is there a chance that the booted version will make it into production, as an MG?

Yes, that is what it says on the image ;)

Oh good news! Lets hope its as good as the K series was when launched. I guess this means the K/N series is only going to be in service for a limited time now then. If they're making a new 2.0 unit it would make sense to use that as the basis for a new 1.8 also, maybe just using a shorter stroke? Any idea if its being designed by the Brit team?

Didn't seem to bother SD1 drivers 30 years ago :P

It had a rear wiper... and it used to always glue itself down because you so rarely used it. Personally I fail to see why any car has a rear wiper.

It had a rear wiper... and it used to always glue itself down because you so rarely used it. Personally I fail to see why any car has a rear wiper.

generally it depends on the profile of the rear of the vehicle, and aerodynamics. if you have a shallow rear roof/boot angle like an SD1 you probably wont need the wiper much, as the airflow seperates from the roofline lower down, causing less turbulence behind the vehicle

on the other hand, a van or a SUV with a steeper angle, or even vertical rear profile causes the airflow to seperate at the roof and then curl back round behind the vehicle, kicking up water and mud etc, hence why vans always have clean me on the back. On a Discovery 3, the rear wiper is almost more important than the front ones!

The news about AP11(350) platform released by SAIC lately confirm some engines and gearboxes.
http://img.xgo-img.com.cn/330_500x279/329991.jpg

Looks like there is a 1.2 turbo petrol engine on the way too!

Oh good news! Lets hope its as good as the K series was when launched. I guess this means the K/N series is only going to be in service for a limited time now then. If they're making a new 2.0 unit it would make sense to use that as the basis for a new 1.8 also, maybe just using a shorter stroke? Any idea if its being designed by the Brit team?
It has never been suggested that the NLE will have a 1.8 version, 2.8 yes but not 1.8, you will have to make do with the 1.6 version of the 350's small engine.

Looks like there is a 1.2 turbo petrol engine on the way too!
The 1.2 is the smallest version of the 350's 1.5T

It has never been suggested that the NLE will have a 1.8 version, 2.8 yes but not 1.8

Who makes a 2.8l straight 4 these days?

Who makes a 2.8l straight 4 these days?
Who would design a brand new V8 these days? !!!

If you want a reasonably efficient engine with a lot of power then that is what you will need in the future, they cant just scale up a K-Series though, if it's going to be at all smooth!

Who makes a 2.8l straight 4 these days?

Ford and Mazda do 2.5L 'fours' in the US!

Who would design a brand new V8 these days? !!!

If you want a reasonably efficient engine with a lot of power then that is what you will need in the future, they cant just scale up a K-Series though, if it's going to be at all smooth!

I couldn't see any mention of a 2.8 there, and who says it has to be a four cylinder? Surely a V6 would be a better fit with what other manufacturers are doing?

I couldn't see any mention of a 2.8 there, and who says it has to be a four cylinder? Surely a V6 would be a better fit with what other manufacturers are doing?
The 2L was supposed to be a four cylinder, the 3.6L a V6.

The 2L was supposed to be a four cylinder, the 3.6L a V6.

I can't see a mention a of a 3.6 either!! And what about the 2.8?

Windy do you want to refer us all to the documents suggesting that there are any engines in the pipeline above 2l?

But then how would you clear the rear window if you needed too?

And why does the saloon not have one?

Generally Saloon's don't have rear wipers... look at the 400/45/ZS Saloons for example, they don't have rear wipers, where the hatch do.

Two nice looking cars. The Saloon looks ok .. if they are to bring out the MG6 Saloon (note the rear badge missing/pinched already) I still prefer the hatch though :broon:

It had a rear wiper... and it used to always glue itself down because you so rarely used it. Personally I fail to see why any car has a rear wiper.

You forget this is a Brit website and they get something called rain over there, LOTS of it :)

You forget this is a Brit website and they get something called rain over there, LOTS of it :)
Not just rain, my most common use of the rear wiper is to clear the overnight condensation/dew so that I can see to reverse off the drive in the mornings, any argument about aerodynamics is irrelevant and it is one reason why I don't have a saloon - I like to be able to see where I am driving!

Windy do you want to refer us all to the documents suggesting that there are any engines in the pipeline above 2l?
OK, a quick google gives me this from Gasgoo


The 2.0-3.6L L4 and V6 series of NLE will be mass-produced as soon as possible to replace the current K-series engine, confirmed Gao Weiming, general manager of the technical center in SAIC.
http://autonews.gasgoo.com/auto-news/6724/SAIC-Roewe-to-roll-out-high-end-NLC-in-2010.html

Looks good - especially in that colour with the ZTV8 alloys.

The only thing I'm not keen on (on both cars) is the kink at the end of the rear side window. :( Looks needlessly fussy.

OK, a quick google gives me this from Gasgoo



http://autonews.gasgoo.com/auto-news/6724/SAIC-Roewe-to-roll-out-high-end-NLC-in-2010.html


Sounds promising. My only concern at this point is the only new engine they've released (1.5) is very underpowered compared to rivals engines not to mention even when compared to the K series. Nobody is going to want a 3.6 V6 that only develops 180bhp! That would just be a waste of time.

Sounds promising. My only concern at this point is the only new engine they've released (1.5) is very underpowered compared to rivals engines not to mention even when compared to the K series. Nobody is going to want a 3.6 V6 that only develops 180bhp! That would just be a waste of time.
I'm not sure why you say that, it's peak bhp figure may be less than you would expect from a K-Series but the peak bhp from a ZR 120 is a lot less than from a TF 135, which both have 1.8 K-Series. The difference is that the lower peak power engine is tuned for fuel economy. The new 1.5 does have an advantage over the basic K-Series though, it has variable valve timing so you can expect significantly more torque through most of the rev-range than you would get from your K-Series equivalent. Having dual cooling systems and thermostats may be an advantage too!

The 1.5 is a brand new engine though. According to reports not only is it underpowered (107bhp) Its harsh above 3000rpm and not particularly economical. All I'm saying is that doesn't bode particularly well for the new engines. I hope I'm wrong.

The 1.5 is a brand new engine though. According to reports not only is it underpowered (107bhp) Its harsh above 3000rpm and not particularly economical. All I'm saying is that doesn't bode particularly well for the new engines. I hope I'm wrong.
I've only seen one report of it being harsh, I've seen far more saying the opposite! I would not expect it to be particularly smooth anyway, if you want smooth then you will want the 2L.

When I changed from my ZS hatch to a saloon, I missed the rear wiper but now I hardly miss it. You just have to make sure all your visual aids are clear before you drive off. I have a rubber blade to my ice scraper which does the condensation build up in just a few seconds.

When I changed from my ZS hatch to a saloon, I missed the rear wiper but now I hardly miss it. You just have to make sure all your visual aids are clear before you drive off. I have a rubber blade to my ice scraper which does the condensation build up in just a few seconds.

I had a new honda civic hatch. They don't have a rear wiper and it was a pain every time I forgot to wipe the rear screen before I reversed (I'm just lazy i guess)

I had a new honda civic hatch. They don't have a rear wiper and it was a pain every time I forgot to wipe the rear screen before I reversed (I'm just lazy i guess)
There was a time when you could have manual front wipers too, although you didn't have to get out of the car to operate them!

Silly thing is that you don't save much by not having it cos you have to carry an ice scraper around all summer instead, and find somewhere to store it that doesn't mind getting wet!

Anyway, the MG6 is selling thousands every month even with a rear wiper, in fact it sold more last month than the Roewe 350 which, doesn't have one!

There was a time when you could have manual front wipers too, although you didn't have to get out of the car to operate them!

Silly thing is that you don't save much by not having it cos you have to carry an ice scraper around all summer instead, and find somewhere to store it that doesn't mind getting wet!

Anyway, the MG6 is selling thousands every month even with a rear wiper, in fact it sold more last month than the Roewe 350 which, doesn't have one! you forgot that last month the 350 was only on sale for two weeks .......ooops!!!
anyway i still find not having a wiper no the rear of the 75 a pain ,have to admit though the rear heater does a good job of clearing the screen. as all of my previous cars were hatchbacks i do miss the wiper although at speed you don't need one ,.
try having an mpv with a non-working rear wiper. (had that problem when one failed)
as for the mg6 ,i suspect with both hatch and saloon at speed you probably don't need it, but slow manouvres and from stationary its a different story.
the last saloon i ever saw with a rear wiper was the ford orion in the early nineties ,didn't seem to suit the saloon.

you forgot that last month the 350 was only on sale for two weeks .......ooops!!!

I thought it was less than that, I wasn't really expecting any to have sold so being SAIC Motor's 3rd best seller for the month is amazing!

I thought it was less than that, I wasn't really expecting any to have sold so being SAIC Motor's 3rd best seller for the month is amazing!
you might be right . it is pretty impressive though.
the mg version (hatch ) and the mg3 i suspect will sell in bigger numbers here than the mg6 .
i have to say that the mg6 and mg3 look good . i think saic may sell more than they expect .

The saloon looks great but I do prefer the sharper looking bootlid on the hatch and the hatch's rear lights look sportier too. Chrome handles on both cars would make them look better and that rear wiper has got to go!

the apex alloys look a little lost on that saloon though...I think it would look better with a set of bigger alloys.

yeap, 350 has been just on the market for only 7 days in April.
and it sold 953 units that month.

550 got 8513
MG6 2123

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/upload/23050/images/001MG6scoop.jpg

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/upload/23050/images/MGR1.jpg

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/upload/23050/images/MGR4.jpg

http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/upload/23050/images/MGR5.jpg

The saloon version of the MG6 in my opinion looks better than the fastback version
What class are these two cars, people say mg6 is mondeo class but i think it looks to small also what class will the mg version of roewe 350 fit?

yeap, 350 has been just on the market for only 7 days in April.
and it sold 953 units that month.

136 per day, and that includes Sundays - should we expect 4220 this month or is it only just getting going?

136 per day, and that includes Sundays - should we expect 4220 this month or is it only just getting going?

According to SAIC's production plan and the market situation, we can expect 10000 per month at the end of this year or the beginning of next year.

This size/class car in China sells very well, SAIC shanghai VW sells Lavida 20000 per month, SAIC shanghai GM sells Excelle 19000 per month and Cruze 15000 per month.

According to SAIC's production plan and the market situation, we can expect 10000 per month at the end of this year or the beginning of next year.

This size/class car in China sells very well, SAIC shanghai VW sells Lavida 20000 per month, SAIC shanghai GM sells Excelle 19000 per month and Cruze 15000 per month.

10,000 a month? Those are figures that MGR would have killed for! When was the last time MGR/Rover group/BL sold 120,000 of one model in a year I wonder? Probably have to go back to the Metro!

10,000 a month? Those are figures that MGR would have killed for! When was the last time MGR/Rover group/BL sold 120,000 of one model in a year I wonder? Probably have to go back to the Metro!

Well, it's in China, the biggest market in the world.
In April, 19 models sold 10,000+ units. include 3 models reached 20,000+

10,000 a month? Those are figures that MGR would have killed for! When was the last time MGR/Rover group/BL sold 120,000 of one model in a year I wonder? Probably have to go back to the Metro!
Don't forget that the Roewe 550 sold in excess of 10,000 in January, it has dropped back a little since but could still average that over the year.

As i've said on other threads i hope the introduction of the models leads to full employment at Longbridge and institgates a new supply industry.

I still can't get excited about either model though, . . . are they a Ford A or a Citreon B or a Renault C or a Toyota D or a Vauxhall E or a Honda F or a Nissan G . etc . . or, are they a little mixture of 'em all. Follow the leader. They certainly need tweaking before they warrant that special badge pinned to their ugly metal mugs and bums.

Styling is a personal thing, but I think they've got the balance between familier and different about right. O.K there are shades of other cars in the design but there's very few cars out there that don't. Rover tried something different to the crowd with the Rover 75 and it never sold in the numbers hoped for/needed. And lets be honest here, you drive a ZR which is more than a little bit similar to an old Civic. MG haven't had a truly new car since the MGF so lets be thankful there's going to be a new product with the badge at all. I'm told the MG6 is a real grower and much better in life than pictures so lets all reserve judgement until we can honestly say "I've seen one".

Well that type of car (of any make) has never really been my thing, but the slate grey one looks OK. It's a bit bland at the rear - jazzed up bythe light clusters - and the ne MG Citroen like front I really don't like, but i can see it selling.

The other one though is awful. The colour really doesn't help, but that rear profile is so tacky and dated. Those light clusters are vile and agree that the wiper looks like a Les Smith (showing my age) cheapo add on. It's sort of like the lighter coloured one was the early prototype that after making they realised what a dogs dinner it was and tidied it up to reach the slate grey version.

you really dont need a wiper on the back of a saloon the airflow, on most os such that it doesn't collect crud in the same way that more upright rear screens do.

i have been driving a saloon for 3 years now and have never had trouble with seeing out of the back.

Re sales, the Golf/Jetta sold over 29,000 in March in Germany, for about 10% of the total market of 294,000, outselling by itself every other brand!

That isn't unusual there.

Next biggest sellers: Polo 9,000 and Passat just under 8,000.

Re output - as the price of petrol is now over £1.30/l and £1.50 and £2 heave into sight, not to mention the CO2 tests, we need to rethink what we need from an engine. Didn't the 1.6 Riley Farina have 72bhp? (hence 4/72)? and to me a 1.6 with 75bhp is quite nippy whereas 85bhp is sporting. The important things will be driveability, reliability, and real world cost, not Top Trumps figures...

Re sales, the Golf/Jetta sold over 29,000 in March in Germany, for about 10% of the total market of 294,000, outselling by itself every other brand!

That isn't unusual there.

Next biggest sellers: Polo 9,000 and Passat just under 8,000.

Re output - as the price of petrol is now over £1.30/l and £1.50 and £2 heave into sight, not to mention the CO2 tests, we need to rethink what we need from an engine. Didn't the 1.6 Riley Farina have 72bhp? (hence 4/72)? and to me a 1.6 with 75bhp is quite nippy whereas 85bhp is sporting. The important things will be driveability, reliability, and real world cost, not Top Trumps figures...
But in a 0-60 dash, your ZS will reach sixty mph 13 seconds before the Riley!

If you go on "Ask MID" both cars appear as ROEWE MG6!
But they appear on the DVLA as MG not ROEWE strange.

Tax seems expensive at £205!

If you go on "Ask MID" both cars appear as ROEWE MG6!
But they appear on the DVLA as MG not ROEWE strange.

Tax seems expensive at £205!
as prototypes they probanly haven't (haven@t) been emissions tested.so they use the pre 01 tax rate .ie the same as my early 75!!

If you go on "Ask MID" both cars appear as ROEWE MG6!
But they appear on the DVLA as MG not ROEWE strange.

Tax seems expensive at £205!

as prototypes they probanly haven't (haven@t) been emissions tested.so they use the pre 01 tax rate .ie the same as my early 75!!

Tax seems expensive at £205????

Roewe is not a brand or manufacturer here. MG is.

In MG Enthusiast there is no comment about the dashboard plastics, the airbags or any ESP, it just goes onand on about wanting 18" wheels! 18"! :yikes:

(you can tell it's a British report)

Tax seems expensive at £205????

Roewe is not a brand or manufacturer here. MG is.

In MG Enthusiast there is no comment about the dashboard plastics, the airbags or any ESP, it just goes onand on about wanting 18" wheels! 18"! :yikes:

(you can tell it's a British report)

Sorry, where did I 'go on and on' ? I made one comment about how I thought the 18" wheels looked better, this was then used as a pull quote for one of my photos.

For the record I did say I felt the quality was better than that of the ZR and ZS.

The piece was intended as an initial reaction to the car, not a full-on, blow-by-blow road test, as such I didn't see the need to discuss the airbags.

Grey coloured MG6 saloon spotted in North Manchester this morning. I believe it to be the same one as shown in the pics earlier in this thread. No sign of a hatch tho. Car looked great in the metal!

Grey coloured MG6 saloon spotted in North Manchester this morning. I believe it to be the same one as shown in the pics earlier in this thread. No sign of a hatch tho. Car looked great in the metal!

The car in these pics is LHD though ?

Tax seems expensive at £205????

Roewe is not a brand or manufacturer here. MG is.

In MG Enthusiast there is no comment about the dashboard plastics, the airbags or any ESP, it just goes onand on about wanting 18" wheels! 18"! :yikes:

(you can tell it's a British report)

I got the tax rate off the DVLA website.

Road tax compared to other cars in it's class does seem high, the type of vehicles the MG6 is competing against will be paying around £150 per year.

I agree Roewe is not a brand or manufacturer here, but it is a brand none the less and it is not the first car to be registered in the UK as a Roewe.

I would have expected the MID search to have shown MG as the marque and "6" as the model but is shows Roewe MG model, probably as it is a pre production prototype?

Grey coloured MG6 saloon spotted in North Manchester this morning. I believe it to be the same one as shown in the pics earlier in this thread. No sign of a hatch tho. Car looked great in the metal!

In the Asda carpark?

In the Asda carpark?

Yes looks to be the same car, reg plate def started VX10 altho i couldnt see the rest of it. Same colour, same wheels.

Edit: Just read Rovermans comment and hes spot on. Cant be the same car i saw as it was most def RHD. Otherwise identical tho.

"VX" is a Worcester area registration, I assume that Worcester would be the nearest tax office to MG Motors so a number of MG Motors vehicles have this prefix - so it could be a different one!

"VX" is a Worcester area registration, I assume that Worcester would be the nearest tax office to MG Motors so a number of MG Motors vehicles have this prefix - so it could be a different one!

I wish i could have snapped it with my phone but it went by too quick. Really did look stunning. Now that i think on it, the car had black tape over the rear lights too. The test driver was most def breaking the 30 MPH limit as well!

Sorry, where did I 'go on and on' ? I made one comment about how I thought the 18" wheels looked better, this was then used as a pull quote for one of my photos.

For the record I did say I felt the quality was better than that of the ZR and ZS.

The piece was intended as an initial reaction to the car, not a full-on, blow-by-blow road test, as such I didn't see the need to discuss the airbags.you're right, reading it again this morning the comment on the wheels has huge prominence mainly from being a "pull quote".

I tend to know that a German road test will concentrate on:

- number of airbags
- is ESP standard?
- soft dashboard plastic

and as such no short report is complete without them there. ;) The reference was, therefore, jokey. :lol:

You do mention the "blackness" of the interior.

Maybe it's a personal thing, I find the 17" wheels on my ZS too big and would be wary of anything any bigger. So seeing the quote so prominently hit my alarm bells...

...though you confirm what we already knew, that the car is longer than a ZS saloon. If only we had an MG which was the size of a ZS hatch!

Congratulations for an interesting piece, though!

have just realised (a bit slow) that there is no way you could fit a towbar to the hatch due to rear foglight being where it is. wouldn't be able to tow my trailertent!!!
looks as if the saloon will be ok ,as long as they don't change the lights!!!
having seem the MGE article i am more impressed with it than ever.

I had a drive in a Chinese-spec one yesterday; UK versions will have slightly different interior trim and bigger wheels (and also the steering wheel will be on the proper side). Very professional effort with good ride and refinement; UK suspension trim again will be different as per the Autocar report. MG Birmingham (aka Longbridge) is being made ready for the big push for 2011. Quality of fixtures, fittings and finish were pretty impressive. It was also very roomy for four but a bit cozy for five grown ups (okay, big kids...). One thing I wasn't so keen on (admittedly a taste issue perhaps) was the boring steering wheel, which I'd like to see changed for UK cars or at least a more sporty offering made available as an option.

Only just seen this thread and I have to say.... what incredibly boring looking cars. The last MG's looked different and sporty, the MG6 is a real disappointment.

have just realised (a bit slow) that there is no way you could fit a towbar to the hatch due to rear foglight being where it is. wouldn't be able to tow my trailertent!!!
looks as if the saloon will be ok ,as long as they don't change the lights!!!
having seem the MGE article i am more impressed with it than ever.

What makes you think that? Lots of cars have amiddle mounted fog light these days, there will be a tow bar manufactured even an aftermarket one that would take that into account I would imagine.
Simon

Styling is a personal thing, but I think they've got the balance between familier and different about right. O.K there are shades of other cars in the design but there's very few cars out there that don't. Rover tried something different to the crowd with the Rover 75 and it never sold in the numbers hoped for/needed. And lets be honest here, you drive a ZR which is more than a little bit similar to an old Civic. MG haven't had a truly new car since the MGF so lets be thankful there's going to be a new product with the badge at all. I'm told the MG6 is a real grower and much better in life than pictures so lets all reserve judgement until we can honestly say "I've seen one".

If you want to be really pedantic the MGF wasn't even a completly ground up new car either. Was based on a back to front metro.

If you want to be really pedantic the MGF wasn't even a completly ground up new car either. Was based on a back to front metro.

You're re opening a right can of worms there!! As I understand it if you took the Metro content out of the MGF you'd still have 90% of the car left.
p.s, duck before the F/TF boys see you!!

Sorry, where did I 'go on and on' ? I made one comment about how I thought the 18" wheels looked better, this was then used as a pull quote for one of my photos.

For the record I did say I felt the quality was better than that of the ZR and ZS.

The piece was intended as an initial reaction to the car, not a full-on, blow-by-blow road test, as such I didn't see the need to discuss the airbags.
You say it has an N-Series engine but the N-Series Turbo was replaced by the Kavachi Turbo almost a year before MG6 production started...

In MG Enthusiast there is no comment about the dashboard plastics, the airbags or any ESP, it just goes onand on about wanting 18" wheels! 18"!

In my copy of MG Enthusiast (June 2010) it says, on page 8, in the corner of the picture:

"The cabin is well-stocked with goodies but UK-spec cars should have less black and more flair"

Only just seen this thread and I have to say.... what incredibly boring looking cars. The last MG's looked different and sporty, the MG6 is a real disappointment.

Thanks Steve for stating the MG6- 3 models are boring and a composite of several manufacturers products. I thought i was on my own. They really don't deserve the MG badge. They do however, warrant a SIAC badge.

From these rather bland shapes more aggressive and sportier derivities could be produced by those cheeky brummies. People would look at a SIAC as they would a Ford, Vauxhall, Citreon etc . . and say, ok yeah quite nice -yeah might buy one and then see the brummie MG special and say "What a car. That's an MG, i wantz it, my precious"

Even peroxide tracey next door with 'er burberry bag and stilletoes would notice a tasty MG as she heads for her bland SIAC .. she would love the car and during the rest of her lifetime would not know what MG stands for - bless.

You say it has an N-Series engine but the N-Series Turbo was replaced by the Kavachi Turbo almost a year before MG6 production started...
Whats the difference between kavachi engine and n-series i thought they are basically same engine based on k-series

Whats the difference between kavachi engine and n-series i thought they are basically same engine based on k-series
The N series was developed by NAC/Lotus, the Kavachi by SAIC/Recardo.

The N series has 1.4, 120 bhp 1.8, 135 bhp 1.8 and 1.8turbo versions, the Kavachi only 1.8 and 1.8turbo.

The 135 bhp N Series uses fixed cams, the 135 Kavachi uses continuously variable cam phasing.

The N Series uses a throttle cable, the Kavachi is fly-by-wire with modified intake and exhaust manifolds.

...

Whats the difference between kavachi engine and n-series i thought they are basically same engine based on k-series

As I understood it, the N series was developed from the K series by NAC, the Kavachi is SAIC's version. No need for two different specs once the two companies became one. I could be wrong though.

No need for two different specs once the two companies became one. I could be wrong though.
The N Series is still used in the MG TF and MG3 SW because it is a different spec!

The N Series is still used in the MG TF and MG3 SW because it is a different spec!

You learn something every day! How long until they're both phased out though? Can't be long now with the new engines due out.

You learn something every day! How long until they're both phased out though? Can't be long now with the new engines due out.
It has been reported that the current batch of TFs is the last, but the MG3SW is scheduled to continue into next year still using the 1.4 and 120 1.8 N Series engines as long as sales keep up.

The NSE will take over for the MG Zero, and already has for the Roewe 350 with production capacity now up at 30 NSE engines an hour.

The N series was developed by NAC/Lotus, the Kavachi by SAIC/Recardo.

The N series has 1.4, 120 bhp 1.8, 135 bhp 1.8 and 1.8turbo versions, the Kavachi only 1.8 and 1.8turbo.

The 135 bhp N Series uses fixed cams, the 135 Kavachi uses continuously variable cam phasing.

The N Series uses a throttle cable, the Kavachi is fly-by-wire with modified intake and exhaust manifolds.

...


Good summary. What I'd also be interested to know is whether they'll keep the 'Kavachi' name or come up with a different monicker for the R.O.W.? Maybe not as I suppose it may have a short life as the NSE and NLE and other engines will eventually take over.

Good summary. What I'd also be interested to know is whether they'll keep the 'Kavachi' name or come up with a different monicker for the R.O.W.? Maybe not as I suppose it may have a short life as the NSE and NLE and other engines will eventually take over.
No point in changing it, the general public will never hear the name anyway!
And there is nothing wrong with naming it after a steam volcano!

I guess the Kavachi will continue until the need for direct injection to meet emissions regulations, which the new engines are designed for. There will still be a significant gap between the 1.5 NSE and 2.0 NLE which neither are designed to fill, although there is talk of a 1.6NSE.

No point in changing it, the general public will never hear the name anyway!
And there is nothing wrong with naming it after a steam volcano!so long as they don't call it EykafjellÍþróttaálfurinnsportacusjokull because 1) you'll never be able to say that and 2) Icelandic volcanoes cover our cars with dust!

I guess the Kavachi will continue until the need for direct injection to meet emissions regulations, which the new engines are designed for. There will still be a significant gap between the 1.5 NSE and 2.0 NLE which neither are designed to fill, although there is talk of a 1.6NSE.Nowadays a 500cc gap is nothing - Volkswagen seem now to go 1.2, 1.4... 2.0 and use all manner of turbos and superchargers to fill the gap...

The N series was developed by NAC/Lotus, the Kavachi by SAIC/Recardo.

The N series has 1.4, 120 bhp 1.8, 135 bhp 1.8 and 1.8turbo versions, the Kavachi only 1.8 and 1.8turbo.

The 135 bhp N Series uses fixed cams, the 135 Kavachi uses continuously variable cam phasing.

The N Series uses a throttle cable, the Kavachi is fly-by-wire with modified intake and exhaust manifolds.

...
Oh ok i wonder which is more reliable, wat u can see under that silly engine cover the engine looks like a k-series

Oh ok i wonder which is more reliable, wat u can see under that silly engine cover the engine looks like a k-series
I imagine the N-Series, the Kavachi has more to go wrong with its dual variable cam system. It does have things like "Smart Cam Sprockets" and a strengthened crank to improve reliability but the N-Series doesn't need them! The Kavachi does have better fuel consumption and torque figures for most of the rev range. Only way to find out is to wait and collect statistics...

theres only one way to find out


FIGHTTTTTTTTTTTT

I imagine the N-Series, the Kavachi has more to go wrong with its dual variable cam system. It does have things like "Smart Cam Sprockets" and a strengthened crank to improve reliability but the N-Series doesn't need them! The Kavachi does have better fuel consumption and torque figures for most of the rev range. Only way to find out is to wait and collect statistics...
yer prob will, i wonder if the 2 engines still have wet liners

yer prob will, i wonder if the 2 engines still have wet liners
I think they both have basically the same liners as the K, unike the NSE which has a dual cooling system and dual thermostats.

I think they both have basically the same liners as the K, unike the NSE which has a dual cooling system and dual thermostats.

Dual cooling and dual thermostat? Do you think an element of fear went into the design? Windy do you know if all the engines have been designed by the Chinese or if the work has been carried out by Ricardo/MGUK? The new 1.5 is a massive concern for me in terms of power per litre next to European rivals considering its the first all new engine from the Chinese MG era. 105bhp from a 1.5 in this day and age is almost embarrasing and is likely to be picked up on in the national press if this engine makes it over here. I know its not all about power but if you look at the big players they are combining power AND economy in their small engines. My big fear is the engines being the catalyst for the re-emergance of jokes aimed at crap engineering and MG.

Dual cooling and dual thermostat? Do you think an element of fear went into the design? Windy do you know if all the engines have been designed by the Chinese or if the work has been carried out by Ricardo/MGUK? The new 1.5 is a massive concern for me in terms of power per litre next to European rivals considering its the first all new engine from the Chinese MG era. 105bhp from a 1.5 in this day and age is almost embarrasing and is likely to be picked up on in the national press if this engine makes it over here. I know its not all about power but if you look at the big players they are combining power AND economy in their small engines. My big fear is the engines being the catalyst for the re-emergance of jokes aimed at crap engineering and MG.
I agree with you, iam scared they will be awful engines mostly because they are chineese, mg uk engines would be better, will be hard to make an engine better then the k-series

Dual cooling and dual thermostat? Do you think an element of fear went into the design? Windy do you know if all the engines have been designed by the Chinese or if the work has been carried out by Ricardo/MGUK? The new 1.5 is a massive concern for me in terms of power per litre next to European rivals considering its the first all new engine from the Chinese MG era. 105bhp from a 1.5 in this day and age is almost embarrasing and is likely to be picked up on in the national press if this engine makes it over here. I know its not all about power but if you look at the big players they are combining power AND economy in their small engines. My big fear is the engines being the catalyst for the re-emergance of jokes aimed at crap engineering and MG.
having had a quick browse through what car's listings the only 1.5 petrols (daihatsu/mitsubishi)put out between 102 and 105 bhp.
most nasp 1.6's only put out between 90 and 120 bhp so i don't think saic's 105 bhp 1.5 is that far off the normal power to be honest.

I know its not all about power but if you look at the big players they are combining power AND economy in their small engines. My big fear is the engines being the catalyst for the re-emergance of jokes aimed at crap engineering and MG.Personally I feel that a 1.4 with a supercharger AND a turbocharger with 168bhp is not designed with reliability even on the same page as the technical requirements (VW TSI) (and I'm not sure if any such requirements were in the same country TBH) ;)

(think Lane Change Assistant, Distance Control, Speed Limit Recognition - what price these on a 5-year-old car let alone a 10-year-old one?)

If MG Motor can put a good case for reliability, it'll be far more important than squeezing Top Trumps numbers out of a pint pot...

...of course, real economy on modern engines is typically a massive 30-40% worse than the unrealistic official figures according to auto, motor & sport...

Dual cooling and dual thermostat? Do you think an element of fear went into the design? Windy do you know if all the engines have been designed by the Chinese or if the work has been carried out by Ricardo/MGUK? The new 1.5 is a massive concern for me in terms of power per litre next to European rivals considering its the first all new engine from the Chinese MG era. 105bhp from a 1.5 in this day and age is almost embarrasing and is likely to be picked up on in the national press if this engine makes it over here. I know its not all about power but if you look at the big players they are combining power AND economy in their small engines. My big fear is the engines being the catalyst for the re-emergance of jokes aimed at crap engineering and MG.
Not fear. Performance, reliability and eu6 emissions requirements. I think it would be fair to say that it is a joint design with the most important technical input coming from the British.

I'm not sure what you are comparing it with? Presumably not a turbo engine as you dont yet know the power output of the NSE 1.5 turbo. Looking at the figures for the competition it seems competetive to me...

Honda http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Detail.aspx?deriv=45695
Ford http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Detail.aspx?deriv=40966
Renault http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Detail.aspx?deriv=41787

PS. The dual cooling is not dual redundant.

Personally I feel that a 1.4 with a supercharger AND a turbocharger with 168bhp is not designed with reliability even on the same page as the technical requirements (VW TSI) (and I'm not sure if any such requirements were in the same country TBH) ;)

Probably not designed to get the most sales either! Was the most popular MG ZR not the 104 bhp version? - and that was bought because it was sporty!

Hi, Im new to this thread. I have a slighty off topic question. If the engines are based upon the K series, that makes them 20 years old?

First released in carb form in the Metro on H reg 1990?

Hi, Im new to this thread. I have a slighty off topic question. If the engines are based upon the K series, that makes them 20 years old?

First released in carb form in the Metro on H reg 1990?actually they were launched in '89 in the wedge 200/400!!!
having said that they were advanced enough .,with a few tweeks that they pass the euro v emmissions rule!!! i suspect the reason saic are slowly replacing them is they won't pass euro vi from 2014 (i think thats the year that euro6 is due)

I think the fastback would look a lot better if it had some sort a spoiler on the boot and the numberplate on the bumper and a smoothed over boot with the mg badge in the middle, like the MK2 MG ZR.
Lewis

I think the fastback would look a lot better if it had some sort a spoiler on the boot and the numberplate on the bumper and a smoothed over boot with the mg badge in the middle, like the MK2 MG ZR.
LewisThis is like deja vu all over again. Talk about "that's precisely what we're supposed to think, Lewis" - my inner Inspector Morse refers you to the answer I posted when you made that exact same post on another thread! :lol:

Hi, Im new to this thread. I have a slighty off topic question. If the engines are based upon the K series, that makes them 20 years old?

First released in carb form in the Metro on H reg 1990?

Most engines have long life spans. Designing all new units is very expensive so engines get a lot of tweaks and tucks over the years to keep them competitive. Its not unusual and most manufacturers today will have at least one engine in their line up that can trace its roots back a long way.

The 1.3 engine in the old Ford KA was first used in the dark ages i believe :D

The 1.3 engine in the old Ford KA was first used in the dark ages i believe :D
It's not that old, and still in production!!!

Originally developed in 1959 for the Ford Anglia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Kent_engine

:lol:

MG6 fastback version ad. video in China

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTU4NjE3MTY0.html

Not fear. Performance, reliability and eu6 emissions requirements. I think it would be fair to say that it is a joint design with the most important technical input coming from the British.

I'm not sure what you are comparing it with? Presumably not a turbo engine as you dont yet know the power output of the NSE 1.5 turbo. Looking at the figures for the competition it seems competetive to me...

Honda http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Detail.aspx?deriv=45695
Ford http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Detail.aspx?deriv=40966
Renault http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/specs/Detail.aspx?deriv=41787

PS. The dual cooling is not dual redundant.

I'm comparing it to the K series. The Rover boys were getting 105bhp from the 1.4 years ago, so I guess I was just hoping for something a bit more impressive from a brand new engine with a bigger capacity from supposedly the same engineers. I'm not saying its a joke or anything, just that it would have been nice if the first completely Brand new engine in 20 years moved the game on as much as the K. It just seems a touch underwhelming.

I'm comparing it to the K series. The Rover boys were getting 105bhp from the 1.4 years ago, so I guess I was just hoping for something a bit more impressive from a brand new engine with a bigger capacity from supposedly the same engineers. I'm not saying its a joke or anything, just that it would have been nice if the first completely Brand new engine in 20 years moved the game on as much as the K. It just seems a touch underwhelming.
If you scale the bhp figure for the K-Series 1.4 up to 1.8 you get 135 - the 1.4 is the equivalent of the TF135 engine, not very fuel efficient!

If you scale the bhp figure for the standard K-Series 1.8 (115bhp) down to 1.4 you get 89 bhp.

If you scale the bhp figure for the standard K-Series 1.8 (115bhp) down to 1.5 to match the size of the new NSE you get 95 bhp while the NSE actually produces 107 bhp.

You could say that the 1.5 NSE is producing more power than the equivalent K-Series while using less fuel, which is as should be expected since it has variable valve timing with a nice torque curve.

I think at most engine speeds it produces more torque than the 1.6 K-Series while using less fuel than the 1.4.

What more do you expect from it?

What more do you expect from it?

A 1.5 Turbo charged 180bhp little monster. :D

A 1.5 Turbo charged 180bhp little monster. :D

http://www.roewe.com.cn/resource/images/roewe350/roewe350_pro_p_2.gif It is on it's way ;)

MG6 fastback version ad. video in China

http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XMTU4NjE3MTY0.html
Welcome pp6800. The following is a funny thought I had - I am glad you posted the advert and look forward to many more posts from you.

Looking again at that video - a man falls down a crevasse and is rescued by a woman who swims out of the frozen-over sea to collect her MG6 as it parachutes down, does some sunbathing before driving to save the man wearing clothes - I think:

1) surely this snowy place is Iceland and MG knew there would be a good reason not to fly but instead to take the MG;

2) Thinking about the other famous Icelandic exports, there are no dodgy banks or fish in the advert, so sending the MG6 down from the sky is a clear reference to Sportacus coming down from his airship to save Lazytown.

http://graphics8.nytimes.com/images/2007/02/17/world/17schev190.2.jpg

...

Isn't this the same actress with different-coloured hair? (no not the one in the still!) :lol:

Y4RofbWYk2s

What more do you expect from it?

With all the money SAIC are throwing into the MG project as a whole, and the brilliance of the UK engineers I was expecting something a bit more than "slightly better" than a 20 year old engine. The K was a masterpiece of engineering when it launched, I just think its a shame the new engines haven't moved the game on like the K did. Tall order I know but I don't think they've made the required leap forward neccesary to get peoples attention. Honda have been producing bullet proof engines capable of delivering 100bhp per litre for years so 105ish bhp from a 1.5 isn't that great, especially if you factor in the fact that it makes LESS power per litre than the 1.4 its replacing. I don't think its too much to hope for that MG should be re launching with cutting edge world class engines.

Honda have been producing bullet proof engines capable of delivering 100bhp per litre for years.
Of the current Honda Civic lineup, only the Type R Mugen manages 100bhp per litre and that costs a little more than the base Roewe 350 you are comparing it with, a base Honda Civic:

Honda Civic Hatchback 1.4 iVTEC Si 5d
0-60 mph 12.6 seconds
98 bhp
94 lb-ft

Of the current Honda Civic lineup, only the Type R Mugen manages 100bhp per litre and that costs a little more than the base Roewe 350 you are comparing it with, a base Honda Civic:

Honda Civic Hatchback 1.4 iVTEC Si 5d
0-60 mph 12.6 seconds
98 bhp
94 lb-ft

Agreed, I'm just pointing out that it can be done. I'm not arguing with you I just think the spec should have been better. Surely 85bhp per litre wouldn't have been difficult to achieve in this day and age resulting in a much more healthy 127ish bhp. All I'm getting at is certainly its going to have decent economy but it should have been a quantum leap over the (ancient) K series, and it just isn't. 20 year and millions of pounds not to mention a completely clean sheet of paper should have resulted in something more special.

Agreed, I'm just pointing out that it can be done. I'm not arguing with you I just think the spec should have been better. Surely 85bhp per litre wouldn't have been difficult to achieve in this day and age resulting in a much more healthy 127ish bhp. All I'm getting at is certainly its going to have decent economy but it should have been a quantum leap over the (ancient) K series, and it just isn't. 20 year and millions of pounds not to mention a completely clean sheet of paper should have resulted in something more special.
The original "(ancient) K series" did not have things like fuel injection, 16 valves, variable valve timing, double cooling system, turbo version. The original 1.4 KSeries only had 75bhp.

The new engine paves the way for direct injection and other new technologies.

...I forgot to mention that the Icelandic volcano suggestion is surely a nod at the Kavachi engine!

The original "(ancient) K series" did not have things like fuel injection, 16 valves, variable valve timing, double cooling system, turbo version. The original 1.4 KSeries only had 75bhp.

The new engine paves the way for direct injection and other new technologies.

The 1.4 was making 103bhp FIFTEEN years ago! You obviously rate this new engine and I've no doubt its fine, but being roughly in line with the competition just isn't enough for MG in a re launch situation. WIndy, be honest here, are the figures really all that you'd hoped for? Didn't you hope it would be a bit more class leading rather than "as good as" the competition?

OK now stop and consider that smart car manufacturers tune their engines for drivability - not raw power. So maybe the new 1.5 has been tuned for a nice flat torque curve that most small 4 pots from Japanese manufacturers could only dream of?

Personally I'd rather have a car with good torque low down than one I have to rag the pants off to get moving.

I'm sure you could tune the new 1.5 turbo for 1000bhp if you were desperate to win the BHP stakes, but what would be the point? It would be useless.

OK now stop and consider that smart car manufacturers tune their engines for drivability - not raw power. So maybe the new 1.5 has been tuned for a nice flat torque curve that most small 4 pots from Japanese manufacturers could only dream of?

Personally I'd rather have a car with good torque low down than one I have to rag the pants off to get moving.

I'm sure you could tune the new 1.5 turbo for 1000bhp if you were desperate to win the BHP stakes, but what would be the point? It would be useless.
That would be why the 5 door Ford Focus 1.6 Duratec (http://www.config.ford.co.uk/fordconnection/multimedia/gbr_en/001/yye/gbr_en001yyefuelspc.htm) produces only 100 PS of power while the 5 door Roewe 350 1.5 VCT with the smaller engine manages to produce 9% more power at 109 PS :confused:

If your looking for a key competetor to R350, that Focus must be it...

That would be why the 5 door Ford Focus 1.6 Duratec (http://www.config.ford.co.uk/fordconnection/multimedia/gbr_en/001/yye/gbr_en001yyefuelspc.htm) produces only 100 PS of power while the 5 door Roewe 350 1.5 VCT with the smaller engine manages to produce 9% more power at 109 PS :confused:

If your looking for a key competetor to R350, that Focus must be it...

That duratec unit is OLD, wasn't partcularly brilliant when it was new and is due to be replaced shortly no doubt by something more punchy and powerful so lets not validate the underwhelming specs of the 1.5 against that. Listen I absolutely love MG which is why I'm on this forum, and I've been harping on to anyone that will listen how the engineers here in the UK could build something unbelievably impressive with the same money as competitors and this engine ISN'T IT. I would defend it into the ground if I thought it was worth it but its just so run of the mill.
Windy if you know something that I'm missing why I should be excited about this engine please say because I must be missing the point.
I'm not really interested in "as good as" I wanted class leading as I said before. I'm won't post anymore about this engine as I appear to be the only one not satisfied with adequate.

That duratec unit is OLD, wasn't partcularly brilliant when it was new and is due to be replaced shortly no doubt by something more punchy and powerful so lets not validate the underwhelming specs of the 1.5 against that. Listen I absolutely love MG which is why I'm on this forum, and I've been harping on to anyone that will listen how the engineers here in the UK could build something unbelievably impressive with the same money as competitors and this engine ISN'T IT. I would defend it into the ground if I thought it was worth it but its just so run of the mill.
Windy if you know something that I'm missing why I should be excited about this engine please say because I must be missing the point.
I'm not really interested in "as good as" I wanted class leading as I said before. I'm won't post anymore about this engine as I appear to be the only one not satisfied with adequate.
The problem is that the only version of the engine that you have any figures for is the base model and even if the engine was capable of producing twice the power, it would have to be resticted to a sensible power output for sale in the car it is fitted to. That car is not an MG, the customers are not looking for 400bhp from a 1.5 engine. It's also a low spec version of the engine, only EU4, no direct injection etc.

Later in the year we will see the turbo version with its dual clutch gearbox capable of handling more torque, and hopefully fitted to an MG and then you can make a better judgement, next year maybe we will see an EU5 version in the UK.

What was special about the K-Series? For some time now it has really only been its lack of weight that has been significant along with reasonable refinement. I'm guessing you haven't judged the new engine on weight? Unlike the K-Series, you cant claim that it is an all alumnium engine!

http://img.xgo-img.com.cn/300/299402.jpg

http://1872.img.pp.sohu.com.cn/images/blog/2010/4/13/22/8/128aa0279e6g213.jpg

The problem is that the only version of the engine that you have any figures for is the base model and even if the engine was capable of producing twice the power, it would have to be resticted to a sensible power output for sale in the car it is fitted to. That car is not an MG, the customers are not looking for 400bhp from a 1.5 engine. It's also a low spec version of the engine, only EU4, no direct injection etc.

Later in the year we will see the turbo version with its dual clutch gearbox capable of handling more torque, and hopefully fitted to an MG and then you can make a better judgement, next year maybe we will see an EU5 version in the UK.

What was special about the K-Series? For some time now it has really only been its lack of weight that has been significant along with reasonable refinement. I'm guessing you haven't judged the new engine on weight? Unlike the K-Series, you cant claim that it is an all alumnium engine!





Damn it, I said I'd speak no more of this engine!!! What was special about the K series? Yes it was light weight, and in the lower capacity (1.4-1.6) it was supremely powerful and smooth. As the engine got bigger its power attributes tailed off, but to be fair we are comparing the 1.4 K to the brand new 1.5 (whatever that may be called) and finding the specific output better on the (20 year old) K series. Lets not argue about the fact that you say the new 1.5 has been shown in its most basic form, even that being the case I don't think you can find a reason to argue this new engine is spectacular. Every manufacturer and his dog can make a reasonable output from a small engine with forced induction, but the K lead the way when it came to normally aspirated power. That isn't the case here. Going back to your claim that this is the basic spec, surely a company resting so much on weening itself off making cars in JV's in favour of striking out on its own would want to show off what its own engineers could do? If I was trying to convince the buying public of my serious intentions to go it alone I would give them my absolute best 1.5 engine and then wheel out the real world mass market product. My fear is that this IS what they're doing! Windy, perhaps one of us should start a new thread titled "why the new 1.5 engine is/isn't good"!

P.S windy, If its not all aluminium what is it? (without the normal twilight zone mystery please and deflective comments about tubing etc being plastic!!!!!)

but to be fair we are comparing the 1.4 K to the brand new 1.5 (whatever that may be called) and finding the specific output better on the (20 year old) K series.
Just checked the powertrain ltd brochure,

Engine: K-Series 1.6 / NSE 1.5
Power: 109 / 109 PS @ 6000 RPM - identical despite the size difference!
Torque: 138 / 135 Nm @ 4500 RPM - easy win for NSE on specific output.

- Compared to the 1.6 K series the specific output is better from the NSE.
- It beats the standard 1.8 K too.
- And it beats the higher powered version of the 1.4 K easily on torque, falling just short on power, I bet it would win easily on fuel consumption though!

P.S windy, If its not all aluminium what is it? (without the normal twilight zone mystery please and deflective comments about tubing etc being plastic!!!!!)
Well to start with, under that plastic engine cover, there is clearly a plastic cam cover which on the K is made from a lump of aluminum alloy...

Well to start with, under that plastic engine cover, there is clearly a plastic cam cover which on the K is made from a lump of aluminum alloy...

I think very few people care what the cam cover, oil pan etc. are made of. Engine material is usually determined by the bloc and head.

I know this is an old thread but I cannot wait for the saloon to be available in proper hot spec to replace my ZS 180.
I've just read some previous comments and couldn't be more opposite in opinion.
People have been quick to proclaim the new MG's bland, but I like their understated good looks.
The new Focus "stands out".
Like a blind cobblers thumb.

I know this is an old thread ....so old that no previous comment is newer than 10 months old.

So old that the MG6 now has a forum of its own!

So old that the MG6 now has a forum of its own!


Might as well make use of it :)

Thread moved.

Yes I'm well aware of the age of the thread. I was googling for images of the MG6 saloon with the 18" wheels, just to remind myself how handsome it is.