I donno, I thought that is why everyone claimed it was not an MG and
hated it for some reason....
So why is there so much dislike for that car?
On Sat, 14 Oct 2000 15:39:43 +0100, paul.hunt1@virgin.net wrote:
>It *is* a mid-engined, rear wheel drive design, why on earth would you
>disbelieve it? And the sites are either http://www.mgcars.co.uk or
>http://www.mg-cars.com. Those in the know reckon there won't be any hard
>info on new models (and then probably only rebadged saloons) until
>Christmas.
>
>PaulH.
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: Andrew B. Lundgren <lundgren@byu.net>
>To: <mgs@autox.team.net>
>Sent: Saturday, October 14, 2000 2:55 PM
>Subject: MGF a "classic mid-engine/rear wheel design??"
>
>
>> I was just on the mgcars.com website looking for any news of the new
>> MGs. (There is none.) I ended up looking under the heritage section
>> and clicked on the '95 MGF, it describes the car as:
>>
>> The arrival of the MGF in 1995 heralded the beginning of a new legend,
>> with its classic
>> mid-engine/rear wheel design.
>>
>> I didn't think it was a mid-engine rear wheel design, I was under the
>> impression that it was an engine up front, front wheel drive.
>>
>> Is that right?
>>
>>
>> --
>> Andrew Lundgren
>> lundgren@byu.net
>> http://www.itwest.net/~lundgren
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Andrew Lundgren
lundgren@byu.net
http://www.itwest.net/~lundgren
|