I agree, the quality is massively increased, it is night and day different to a trad car......is it better........🤷🏻♂️???
To be honest though they had a pretty low target to beat.....
It is, in itself, for a morgan, a really good car..... However.... compared to the competition it's very average at best.
The Morgan trad's quirky, leaky, rattly, low tech, impractical, outdated, vintage look, vintage feel, variable quality, readily personalizable nature is what make/made them such a special motoring experience. Unique in this day and age. A USP that kept the factory busy and sales brisk for decades.
I accept that the factory/Italians felt they needed to 'move on' and update but I still feel very strongly that they lost the 'special-ness'. MMC carried on stubbornly building a car that was decades out of date, bucking the trend of the rest of the world's motor manufacturers who rushed to modernise and embrace progress.
MMC.... stick to what you're good at, building relatively cheap, lightweight, low tech, fun cars.
Leave all the rest to the big boys.
I reckon you have it 180 degrees out. The history book of british motoring is absolutely full of names where the maker didnt modernise and embrace progress. Just go to any classic car meet to see what I mean.
I hope Morgan will be the exception but I fear not when a new Plus 6 costs more than a 911. Premium pricing for a non premium product is a route to failure - Rover tried it as the last gasp. Not to mention Alvis, Jenson etc.
In my youth in the 60s I was a petrol head and I would look at Morgans as the equivalent to the MGB, Healey 3000, TR etc. Similar price, similar performance and even similar engineering. You cannot realistically say that the old Trad was similar to the MX5 as the MGB' current replacement.
This of course is all from a business perspective - there is no rational accounting for some of the owner emotions seen on TM