mgs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: Midget vs. B (Was MG decision)

To: "Max Heim" <mvheim@studiolimage.com>, "MG List" <mgs@autox.team.net>
Subject: Re: Midget vs. B (Was MG decision)
From: Larry Macy <macy@bblmail.psycha.upenn.edu>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 20:12:53 -0500
Well now. The challenge is set. I have read R&T for years and I will not 
dispute the findings of those folks. However, in real world driving I 
spend more time on the brakes behind a B, in the twisties, than any 
Spridget I have ever followed. Maybe the brakes, maybe the clumsy feel, 
maybe the weight. I never claimed that a Midget could out brake a B - not 
enough personal data. But given the lower weight I would bet it could. 
(as a side note the disc brake pads on a 2000 Ford Focus are almost 
exactly the same size as those on my Midget) Nor have I ever said that a 
Midget will out accelerate a B. Interesting to note that for a while they 
would - according to R&T. As far as winning races is concerned the B and 
the Midget are not normally in the same class. But there are a lot of 
racers that drive Midgets and win. And a Midget is a lot more fun to 
drive - yea less room but better handling.

As a real world for instance  - I took on an X/19 (not necessarily the 
best car ever made but a good handler for the time) on a mountain road 
and he wondered why I could out run him on a mountain road. Not a a B, 
but more horsies. Yea I will give the horsepower argument with out even a 
whimper but I will argue the handling. Seen it, been there, done it. 

Used to Autocross against stock B's and eat their lunch too. As well as 
race prepped Tr3's (well a single one I raced against). 

Will not argue the stats - will argue the real world experience.

Larry

BTW as far as the rusting issue - I base that on real world experience 
and observation at shows -  what ever and the Owner of SolentMG - an old 
English MG shop that has more than 30 years of experience, in England, 
working on MG's, body and soul. He even had the only MGB pickup (best use 
I ever saw of a B/GT[Now that is gonna piss somebody else off]) at one 
time.  

>>>>On 11/24/99 5:40 PM so and so (Max Heim) said. (And I quote:)

>OK, I think I've heard enough about how Midgets can "outcorner and 
>outbrake" Bs. Let's look at some real test data.
>
>*Road & Track Road Tests - All-Synchro MGB (July 1968), Midget III vs. 
>Spitfire Mk. 3 (September 1967)
>
>1968 MGB/1967 Midget
>HP 92/65
>Torque 110/72 
>Test Wt. 2590/1911
>0-30 3.9/4.3 sec
>0-60 12.1/14.7
>1/4mi. 18.7/19.9
>Top spd. 104/86
>RPM@60mph 3410/3896
>80mph stop 0.72/0.81 G
>Lateral G na/na
>Slalom na/na
>
>As one would expect, the more powerful B out-runs the Midget handily. The 
>Midget pulls more Gs under hard braking, but R&T didn't do braking 
>distance tests at the time. They also didn't do any sort of objective 
>handling test, which is unfortunate. They describe the Midget as 
>"handling very well", and the MGB as "vintage", but this may have more to 
>do with differing expectations and the lapse of a year's time than with 
>the car's individual qualities. The authors are already carping about the 
>B being out-of-date! Little did they know...
>
>Conclusion: about what you'd expect. Insufficient data for handling 
>comparison.
>
>These are the earliest more-or-less equivalent tests I have. Of course, 
>earlier B's had slightly more HP, and earlier Midgets had smaller 
>engines, so I would expect the B to do slightly better in, say, a 1965 
>comparison.
>
>*Road & Track Track Test - Back to Basics - 9 Showroom Stock Sports Cars 
>- April 1973
>
>1973 MGB/Midget
>HP 79/55
>Torque 94/67
>Test Wt. 2590/1995
>0-30 4.6/4.9 sec
>0-60 13.7/15.5
>1/4mi. 19.5/20.3
>Top spd. 94/85 (at Riverside Raceway)
>Lateral G 0.795/0.758
>Braking 80-40 mph 296/306 ft
>Square skidpad lap 13.1/13.5 sec
>Lap time  55.2/57.3 (at Riverside Raceway)
>
>Still close to "prime time" for the B, it beats the Midget in all 
>categories, and actually won 2 categories overall in the test (the 
>Midget's best finish was 4th in square skidpad). Here are R&T's 
>summaries: "MGB - has more than tradition going for it. It feels harsh 
>and clumsy but doesn't look that way on the clocks. The MGB's secret of 
>success is that a driver can use everything the car has." "MG Midget - 
>won nobody's heart. The lack of speed was expected but the stiff and 
>vague steering, the roll oversteer, the mushy front end and the general 
>feeling of cramped obsolescence were things we had forgotten. The Midget 
>won't win races because it doesn't go fast."
>
>Conclusion: pretty much a slam dunk for the B at this time. Interesting 
>that they point out  that the B "feels" clumsy but is actually quick on 
>the track... perhaps this explains the attitude of Midget owners -- they 
>get into a B and it strikes them as clumsy. Just don't get into a match 
>race with one!
>
>*Road & Track Comparison Test - 6 Affordable Sports Cars - June 1976
>This year is the "best case" scenario for the Midget (or, more precisely, 
>the "worst case" for the B).
>
>1976 MGB/Midget
>HP 62.5/55.5
>Torque 72/73 (!)
>Test Wt. 2645/2170
>0-30 5.5/4.8 sec
>0-60 18.3/15.5
>1/4mi. 21.5/20.1
>Top spd. 90/83
>RPM@60mph 3320/3700
>60mph stop 177/189 ft
>Lateral G 0.698/0.737
>Slalom 53.0/50.1 mph
>
>In this year the Midget has a better power-to-weight ratio, as shown by 
>its superior acceleration, although it is also helped by its lower 
>gearing. It (curiously) has inferior braking despite the B's almost 
>500lb. weight penalty. And despite the Midget's higher G-rating and 
>power-to-weight ratio, the B beats it decisively in the slalom. 
>Basically, this test turns one's expectations upside-down.
>
>Conclusion: In this time period, B owners would be well advised to avoid 
>Midgets at stop lights... not to mention Plymouth Valiants, Datsun B210s, 
>and just about anything with wheels. But through the cones, things are 
>reversed. Go figure...
>
>*1979 - Road & Track Road Tests - Sports & GT Cars Annual
>
>1979 MGB/Midget
>HP 62.5/50
>Torque 88/67
>Test Wt. 2506/2005
>0-30 4.0/4.4 sec
>0-60 13.9/14.3
>1/4mi. 19.8/20.3
>Top spd. na/na
>RPM@60mph 3260/3360
>60mph stop 177/189 ft
>Lateral G 0.698/0.737
>Slalom 53.0/50.1 mph         
>
>Both cars have apparently benefited from a lighter test driver (actually, 
>computerized timing equipment replaced the passenger). But where the B's 
>torque has gone way up, with noticeable acceleration improvements, the 
>poor Midget's HP and torque have gone down the tubes, and so has its 
>advantage, the slight improvements attributable to the lower test weight. 
>Its only bragging point is lateral G's. In the subjective ratings, well, 
>I don't want to start a flame war, but the subtitle of the Midget article 
>is, "Why would anyone want one?". To be fair, the B test is titled "We 
>complain. BL makes money. Time stands still."
>
>Conclusion: the last Midgets seem to have suffered some developmental 
>neglect compared to their larger siblings, which actually improved from 
>1976-1980. The Midget just went downhill.
>
>Overall conclusion: owners of certain Midgets can claim some superiority 
>over early rubber bumper Bs. Otherwise, though, they'd better watch the 
>talk, because statistically, they can't walk the walk. Subjectively, the 
>tests seem to bear out the Midget's impression of superior "nimbleness", 
>but it doesn't seem to translate into objective performance. But if that 
>nimbler feel is what toasts your crumpet, by all means, stand by your 
>Midget. Just don't diss the B's braking and handling, because the 
>stopwatch says you won't be able to back it up.
>
>All set with Nomex underwear,
>Max
>
>P.S. BTW Larry, where do you get "Midgets are far less prone to rusting 
>than a B"??? Is it that there's just less of them to rust?
>
>
>Larry Macy had this to say:
>
>>Boy am I glad you got both. I hadn't had a chance to chime in but you 
>>didn't get a very good hearing from us Midget owners. The Midget is a 
>>great car. The 1500 engine is very strong and reliable (at least mine 
>>is). The ZS carb is a piece of crap but then again so is the ZS on a 
>>later B. My personal preference is the rubber bumpered Midgets look 
>>better than the chrome bumpered ones. Also Midgets are far less prone to 
>>rusting than a B. In addition the Midget will out corner any stock B ever 
>>made. Won't out run them but will more than make up for it in the 
>>twisties. I much prefer the Midget to a tank like an MGB.
>>
>>Shields Up
>>
>>Larry
>>
>
>
>--
>
>Max Heim
>'66 MGB GHN3L76149
>If you're near Mountain View, CA,
>it's the red one with the silver bootlid.


Larry Macy
78 Midget

Keep your top down and your chin up.

Larry B. Macy, Ph.D.
macy@bblmail.psycha.upenn.edu
System Manager/Administrator
Neuropsychiatry Section
Department of Psychiatry
University of Pennsylvania
3400 Spruce St. - 10 Gates
Philadelphia, PA 19104

 Ask a question and you're a fool for three minutes; do not ask a 
question and you're a fool for the rest of your life. 


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>