Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Classic Morgans (pre-CX) Roadster II?

The specifications for the Roadster II are up on the Company site. They show a bhp drop to 204 bhp or approximately 11% from the information given on the Roadster I.

In fact, this is not a steep a drop it looks from the brochures. It has recently come to light that the Works made an innocent error and over-quoted the Roadster I's horsepower. In fact, the Roadster I was/is 212 horsepower and therefore the drop is only
3.75%.

This will make the new (and more robust) final ratios even more noticeable.

Lorne

I was told by one of the Lightweight Roadster racers (cannot remember who now) that the Mk1 produced more than quoted as the exhaust was better flowing than the Ford test set up.

One thing is for sure - the quoted figures are wrong

Is there any information out there that can supports gomog's claim:
"It has recently come to light that the Works made an innocent error and over-quoted the Roadster I's horsepower. In fact, the Roadster I was/is 212 horsepower and therefore the drop is only
3.75%."
Alternatively, did any TM owner of Roadster S1, put their car on an engine dynamometer, and can give actual results?
I am asking this as I am writing a series of articles on the various iterations of the Roadster. These articles will be published in the magazine of the Dutch Morgan club.

Simon, I think that anyone in this situation of having to make a choice might be more swayed, first by finding a Roadster which ticks most of the preference boxes, and then by considering the dashboard. Although I didn't particularly like the ivory guages back in 2008 when I bought my S1, I really did like the speedo and revcounter ahead of the driver, with the four auxiliaries across the centre of the dashboard. OK the bright coloured push switches are an acquired taste, but can be changed. The S2 dash reverts to black gauges, so much more traditional, but I really don't like the revcounter dead ahead with speedo & tri gauge in the centre. And that's what you look at most of the time. The other factor is that the shallow S1 dashboard allows more upward adjustment of the steering column, and I also think that was the time when the tapered wooden batterns under the seats were removed to compensate.

So against all that, minor differences in performance, or perceived performance really don't matter that much. I would always go for whichever car ticked most of my boxes.

When I bought my roadster I in 2004 I was astonished to find the 0-60 time was well under 5 seconds, closer to just over 4 seconds. Someone who shall remain nameless at the factory told me the published figures were slower because the roadster clearly out accelerated the Aero 8. I never came across anything that could out accelerate me up to 70mph or so.
And using 3rd gear in anger was an astonishing and frightening experience.
The mk II didn't perform in the same way at all in my experience.
Just my opinion....but in fact I don't think any Morgan model ever has been able to match the 4.2 seconds to 60 that camevwith the original roadster.
Nick

Strange also that the 3.7 Roadster with a conservative extra 68 bhp and bags more torque has a published and likely more realistic 0-60 time of 5.2 seconds

As Dave W said, Probably the best dash layout both practically and aesthetically ever fitted to a classic!

From Top Gear in 2004: A six may be a bit nouveau for the diehard flat-cappers that Morgan's fortunes depend upon, but the stats speak for themselves. With 223bhp and 206 lb ft of torque in a car that weighs just 940kg, performance is startling. Cars this rudimentary shouldn't be pulling to 60mph in 4.9 seconds and topping out at 134mph. But, allegedly, they do.

Who can say, but realistically a one second difference to 60 in the 5 second bracket is going to be what? A car length? Can somebody do the maths? I can't be bothered!

Dave the S1 is a lovely car so is the 3.7 but having just done 1100 miles in my CX to Luxembourg & back a lot in biblical rain with a dry interior I'm a convert.
The 3.7 gearbox tunnel wasn't liked by HO. The sapce in the CX is.

I had all three series with the 3.0 litre engine. My Roadster S1 from 2005 had the best gearshift, Getrag, with the best gear ratio in all gears. The S2 was very elastic and had the smoothest and fullest engine sound. I was one of the few who got a new control unit at the expense of MMC after a year to get rid of the revhang problem of the S2. But it wasn't just that that was different. The engine became much livelier and more powerful. I suspect it was a very similar control unit to the one used in the 3.0 S3. With the S3, I didn't really like how drony the exhaust system was, maybe because the spare wheel was missing and the rear was closed, creating a resonance box. I don't know. Looking back, I loved the S2 with the new control unit the most of all, it had become very sporty overnight, and it had a beautiful, silky, full sound. I could get over the fact that it wasn't a Getrag transmission but a Ford... with the low gears too short and the high gears too long. Actually, only the third and fourth gears were right. Anyway, it was a very good car.