Tally ?

[Guest]

Hate to steal your thunder, but I also have a 1.3LX, which is currently my daily runaround, until I decide on one of three things: to keep it, to get a Peugeot 405 t/d estate, or a Montego t/d estate.....


Ricky.

Ok, didn't see that.

If you must go for one of those diesel estates, please go for the monty. I've had 2 peugeot diesels and they're nothing but trouble, i'll never buy any french car ever again.

[Guest]

WooHooo!!!

Well, we've passed the half century !

So far my count is 58 currently owned/cared for by the members of this board.

Now then, i'm sure there are more than that!

So come on then, all those that have not yet posted your ownership list, there must be nearer a hundred cars or more?


Mal.

[John S]

Two cars, one in my name (MG)....

M170 RFA - Maestro 2.0 Turbo Diesel (Nightfire red, Tickford kit), first car.
G460 JCK - MG Maestro 2.0 Turbo 399/505, three previous owners. Awaiting respray next spring and being restored with brand new doors, sills, decals, wheels, lights and other bits.

Previously....

D261 RNB - Maestro 1.6 Vanden Plas - 96,000 miles (scrapped)
F300 0VC - Montego Vanden Plas 2.0 EFi Auto, 130,000 miles (scrapped)
D--- SMB - Montego 1.3 (scrapped)
G505 PFR - Maestro Diesel pick-up conversion (scrapped)

[Beaker]

D--- SMB - Montego 1.3 (scrapped)

Scrapped a 1.3 Montego

[D87SMW]

Montego

Scrapped a 1.3 Montego

There's a change.

M170, was your Maestro Pick-up for sale before you scrapped it? Around 2001?

[John S]

The 1.3 Montego was bought in 1999 by my dad for £100. I had a drive in it off road and it was terribly underpowered and vibrations shook the dashboard about something chronic. I doubt there was a great deal wrong with it just that I didn't know much about Montego 1.3s at the time.
The Vanden Plas was bought for the interior and spare parts as was the Montego.
Finally, the pick-up had bent a con-rod in the engine and had holes on the roof seams.

John

[Shazza]

Scrapped a 1.3 Montego

Almost as bad as scrapping a Maestro Turbo.

[Beaker]

Almost as bad as scrapping a Maestro Turbo.

I would have said that the other way around. I know of 2 Montego 1.3's in the country, but there are well over 100 Maestro Turbos.

[Shazza]

I would have said that the other way around. I know of 2 Montego 1.3's in the country, but there are well over 100 Maestro Turbos.

Yes but what is worth more? 100 isnt alot either. And this has not been confimed either. By this time next year i estimate maybe 75 car's left. In any case, if these car's are in the hands of enthusiasts, they shouldnt be scrapped regardless.

[Austin-Rover]

Yes but what is worth more?

Where does value come into it?

I would have thought an enthusiast would be more concerned about saving/running/enjoying any Maestro or Montego, rather than ranking cars into an order by which lesser models are not considered saving because they are 'worth less'

A 1.3 Montego is just as valuable to our motoring heritage as a Maestro Turbo. To try and place a monetary value on them is a bit of an oversight.

[Shazza]

Where does value come into it?

I would have thought an enthusiast would be more concerned about saving/running/enjoying any Maestro or Montego, rather than ranking cars into an order by which lesser models are not considered saving because they are 'worth less'

A 1.3 Montego is just as valuable to our motoring heritage as a Maestro Turbo. To try and place a monetary value on them is a bit of an oversight.

I made that point because it's an interesting one very applicable to the cars as a whole.

Spend 3-4k restoring a 1.3 Montego is all well and good, and great for the enthusiasts community, but why not save a car thats universally recognised as THE ultimate model in favour of a base model which was very underpowered and so poorly equipped that only eccentrics love it for it's simplicity.


This is the issue i'm trying to push forward. A thread was posted on this very forum to gauge this response to see if a particular model was favoured and if it was 'worth' spending the time on without anyone knowing it was the most saught after maestro model ever made.

All car's of ANY value and restorable condition should be saved by their owners regardless of actual value or sentimentality (which is more important)

And i will push this point right now, its got nothing to do with being a badge snob as has been mentioned in the past. I own a Countryman for a start, my first proper car was a 1.3 L Maestro lest we not forget the poor little bugger that i regret scrapping deeply at the time but it was a decision forced upon me due to lack of space.

I'm doing all i can to preserve these car's, i even run a business restoring them at affordable prices for most people so they can continue driving their car's for years to come. I'm actually DOING something rather than talking about it because time is running out.

[Austin-Rover]

...but why not save a car thats universally recognised as THE ultimate model in favour of a base model which was very underpowered and so poorly equipped that only eccentrics love it for it's simplicity.

Do you hold a Turbo in higher regard over other models? Following your logic, the make up of preserved Maestro's and Montego's in the future would be just MG's and other high spec, high performance versions, as it wont ever be worth spending cash on basic models like 1.3's, 'Base' models and the humble 'L'. That’s not right.

The argument for saving cars like 1.3 Montego's is much stronger than that of saving a Turbo. It represents an entirely different view of motoring than an MG Turbo, of which plentiful numbers remain. It’s the sort of car that people remember from their past, the car fond memories are made of - street furniture. Not a low volume specialist car that is desirable to a limited number of enthusiasts. the 1.3 Is not a car that is quick off the mark, but thanks to the best engine the company ever made, it can still hold its own today. That and its seemingly sparse interior are a testament to design and the era in which it was built.

If there is to be a fair make up of cars in the future, to reflect what the Maestro and Montego really were - the bread and butter cars of the 80's - then people like you need to understand that a car should not be dismissed just because it is 'slow' and doesn’t come with a clock or a cig lighter.

Apart from that , everything else you say I agree with.

[Shazza]

Do you hold a Turbo in higher regard over other models?

I would be stupid to say no. It has power steering. It has a nicer gearchange with its pg1 box over the pudding stirrier VW box. It's just as comfortable, and it even looks good. So yes, i do hold it in higher regard over the lower end models because it was so well sorted. It's the better car, full stop.

But i like the lower specced 'lesser' badged cars for their simple charms. They do exactly what the were designed to do and more, because they are still holding the test of time. And they should be saved as much as the more popular sporty models. I've already said that numerous times.

The argument for saving cars like 1.3 Montego's is much stronger than that of saving a Turbo. It represents an entirely different view of motoring than an MG Turbo, of which plentiful numbers remain. It’s the sort of car that people remember from their past, the car fond memories are made of - street furniture. Not a low volume specialist car that is desirable to a limited number of enthusiasts

So your saying if you had two car's, one was a turbo , the other a 1.3 base model, both in equal condition, that you would prefer to restore the 1.3 because it could be rarer in future years and scrap the turbo??? This is what its sounding like to me.

The Turbo was not a specialist car in anyway, in the same way the Montego Turbo was the faster version of the EFi, the Maestro Turbo is to the everyday EFi version. It's nothing special in its construction but its limited run makes it special. The same as a Focus RS is much saught after already, and the Ford Racing Puma as just two example.

If there is to be a fair make up of cars in the future, to reflect what the Maestro and Montego really were - the bread and butter cars of the 80's - then people like you need to understand that a car should not be dismissed just because it is 'slow' and doesn’t come with a clock or a cig lighter.

I take offence to that comment. Your tarring me with some sort of boy racer image which i am most definatly not! I could say your the typical pipe and slippers Montego owner who farts along at 20mph in a 40 but that would be making an assumption, would it not????

A friend of mine is 55 years old, and he drives a modified MG Maestro. He likes to drive fast sometimes, race the odd Ferrari, that sort of thing. but does that make him a boy racer? No. It doesnt.

And here comes my closing point. For the car's to survive, this club has to realise that there are many different types of owners from all age ranges that are enthusiasts for the car's. Some may drive diesels, economical 1.3's or rapid 2 litre turbos, but they are all one thing. Enthusiasts.

You have to accept them all for there to be a chance for the car's survival. You can't chose what the owner is like for them to be accepted within the MMOC. And you wonder why i dont want to be a part of helping you lot out, despite my support over the summer months, even attending a camp over a the BL rally, you still slag me off behind my back

[e692wtt]

I would rather stick with my Montego 1.6L Saloon, for several reasons. Main one is that it suits my purposes exactly, but another is that it is the 'high range' models that tend to be preserved, pampered, restored - often from an early age - whereas the 'low range' models tended to be workhorses from day one (my Monty did 48,000 miles in his first 4 years, but as a family car) so don't survive in significant numbers although they were sold in much greater numbers. My Montego also costs me very little to run but is 100% reliable, which is the major reason for keeping him for 8 years - and I plan on many more. It's also nice to have a car that blends in and doesn't attract too much attention on the road.

A good number of people owned 'low range' Maestros and Montegos, but very few owned Montego Turbos (I know of two) and I doubt that anyone I will ever meet owned a Maestro Turbo in the past. The 2 Montego Turbo owners are very enthusiastic about their (old) cars, but many many more people are enthusiastic about the 'cooking' models when they see them around. I would say the 'low range' models are more relevant to Joe Public's memories of the eighties and early 90s.

I actually prefer my Monty to my 1983 Maestro Vanden Plas. If push came to shove, the Maestro would go.


Getting back onto the original topic, I forgot to mention that my first car was a Mini Mayfair, 1984 A-reg. It was black and cost a fortune to keep running - much of the time it was a Flintstones car...


YABADABADOOOOO!!!!!!!!!! :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:


What's the tally now, Mal?

[Austin-Rover]

If I had both a Turbo and a base model car, I would choose the base model over it, yes. Not because it could be rarer than a Turbo, but because it already is rarer than a Turbo. More cars like this need to be saved. Dan and Lind's new Turbo for example, is in pretty bad shape, not terminal - but I would consider it a worthwhile car to break, merely to keep other Turbo's on the road and looking their best. Enthusiasm may be better used on cars like a unique 1.3 Police car for example. There is a healthy number of Turbos in the hands of enthusiasts to ensure their numbers won't ever fall to dangerous numbers. Considering their age, Maestro Turbos have a fantastic survival rate when you consider the numbers built. Likewise, you don’t see that many Montego 1.3's about do you? So I would always choose that car over a Turbo, should the situation ever arise.

I don’t see exactly what you have taken offence at, I was simply stating a valid observation that you seem to view the Turbo as a superior model over all others. It’s unfair to compare it to, for example, a 1984 car. In terms of equipment and performance of course it is going to be better, but it’s not necessarily more worthy of respect or a higher standing when compared to other cars. Nor does owning one give you the right to refer to drivers of 1.3 Montego's as 'eccentric', which I could take offence at.

With regards to your ‘Closing Point’, as far as I am aware, the club has no stipulations against the age of its members, nor does it discriminate against what car you drive. All badges and trim levels are welcome, and held in the same regard, as each is special in its own way.

Why does your last paragraph suggest you are being discriminated against? You are a valued member of this community, you have never been told to leave. And yes, we do wonder why you don’t want to be a part of ‘helping us out’. Every incarnation you have had on these forums has offered us all excellent advice and experience. I hope you will come to understand that no one ‘slags you off’.

Thank you for a lively debate!