Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Classic Morgans (pre-CX) Buying old or new

Its interesting how Morgan owners will put up with poor build quality because we love the cars and because "They are hand built Sir". It is the same with Defenders which I know a lot of TM folk own or have owned as have I. They are pretty much hand built too and have suffered from niggling to major faults. Most Defender owners also put up with these faults because they love the vehicle and also I guess because its British (or was).

I wonder if the new Morgans from the 50's through to the 80's had much in the way of niggling electrical (other) issues? Certainly my 69 4/4 was never bothered by such problems and thinking back to the other cars I had in the 60's to 80's neither did they although they did tend to rust on a sunny day! Simple electrics, simple to fix!

Blackadder

You are spot on, an extra $2000 on the purchase price would have not been an issue
for but better badges, decent Crome etc.

Jeff

4/4. 2011

I take all the issues and quality problems mentioned here by others serious. And I agree that Morgan should make some homework which is necessary to make owners happy and let us feel confident.

When I recall some of my first posts here in 2009 I certainly did not make many friends regarding some explicit description of qualiy issues. But the joy of driving a Mog won over the years till now. May be my post about teething and the badge enamel shows a little bit of an ironic attitude, but somehow in certain situations, when quality issues become aware, it helps... at least myself, when reacting with a note of bitter humor.

The most important point to me is, that during the ownership of some Mogs, mostly the same areas of quality issues will repeat from car to car and therefore they are somehow predictable.
Therefore, it should be manageable for Morgan to rise the quality a bit, when focussing such areas.

The door mirrors are like a symbol for those areas, Morgan should really better this. The mirrors are completely useless and the mirror holder is of the cheapest quality of cheap chrome, which lasts until the first rain appears. As those experiences are priming the otherwise proud owners I would never save some pence on those emotionally important items.

To come back to the topic of this thread, I would again buy a newish car because the joy of day to day driving has my priority. But the drift of the thread shows, that obviously a new Mog is closer to a classic Mog regarding the need of maintenance and care in comparison with other brands.

Perhaps someone could start a poll to collect experiences, which areas of quality issues are how often mentioned, which are technically important to solve, and which are emotionally important to solve.
(I hope I could make clear the differentiation between "technically" and "emotionally". i.e. engine issues vs. mirros)......of course techical failures will arise bad emotion as well.

Lotus are hand built too. 20 years ago they innovated and built something great - and 20 yr old Elise's with their glued aluminium chassis are still around today. They only die when crashed! Early ones had issues, but over time screws go tighter, components modified etc. Management focused on improvement - probably forced because the press took more interest in Lotus than Morgan - and from 2008-on the cars are pretty good. Every year they get better.

MMC clearly have not made the same effort and charge nearly 50k for a fully-spec'd +4. I read Lotus forums regularly and the quality issues are now more the exception. Morgan owners see it as charming, and so MMC don't try. Sorry, i love the car, the community and really enjoyed my factory trip, but if MMC are to prosper they need to wake up. Foreign markets may not be as tolerant and bad PR can be costly (Jaguar?).

I'm a glass half-full guy, and a trip in the old girl is life affirming. I even enjoy covering the engine before washing, oiling the seams and greasing the kingpins. That's the real charm...

Heinz
you're right to raise emotion, for that's very important.
I normally buy pre-owned cars and enjoy a varied fleet without suffering depreciation. However, for the +4 we bought new and relished the specification being ours. So the 'disappointment' at silly superficial things mounts as they keep building up.

If we love Morgan we do it no favours by forgiving bad management. Production processes have moved on and hand built cars are getting better while still being hand built. Using cheap chrome and glovebox latches might be good for the bottom line short-term but costs in bad PR. The car should still be hand made, none of the hand cut louvres, the wood frame or the laminated dash in my car have failed, but cheap components and glue have.

I agree, that Lotus has a good built quality. I know because I have a 2007 Elise from new, now for sale...

I would like to add, that efforts in the car industry to reach a better quality standard are most times a reactive behave.

In 2001 the Opel/Vauxhall Speedster was launched. In 2002 a buddy from university time was employed in the market research department of Opel in Rüsselsheim. He told me (secretly at that time) that a bunch of several 100 cars had to be returned to Lotus, because the quality was very very poor and Opel/Vauxhall refused to accept this Speedsters, built at Lotus plant. Lotus had to spend huge money and time to rework them all. That was a very bitter pill for Lotus and the main reason why Lotus could transfer the quality expectations of GM to their own brand. Therefore the better quality on Lotus cars was a nice side effect of this issue with GM but not motivated by Lotus itself in the first place.

Absolutely.
It was Chapman himself who said that the ideal race car would fall apart just after the chequered flag. Any further and it was over-engineered! Of all cars, Lotus was the one to push out low quality in hope/belief that customers would enjoy Lotus engineering.
Lotus now compete (struggle) in a niche and competitive market and are forced to think about quality. new CEO looks good btw, someone like him could transform MMC and leave the essential DNA intact.

That is what we all hope Steve Morris will be able to achieve.

I wonder how representative of purchasers TMers are? How many owners never experience problems? I have had a think about reliability issues with my own cars from early Riley, MG's, Triumph, Lotus and then thirty years of Morgans and I can't think of anything other than that time when the current one cut out and my brain didn't identify the relay quickly enough. The first 76 4/4 was a bit shaky but I rebuilt it and it had had hard racing use before I owned it, but apart from a dodgy light switch once (easily mended) none of them have let me down. Things wear out of course but that isn't what people are talking about. The current 89 Plus Four has no corrosion visible, the leather is strong thick and supple and I have been very pleased with it. Frankly I am put off a little from a new car but, I would still love to order one.

That's what I want to say with my first post, Meabh. I take the chance to reply herewith saying, my Mogs all were reliable and would start every time I liked it. I was several times in South France and in Italy with different Mogs, all went fine.

No reason why not to purchase a new Mog. But most Mogs need to "settle in" and have some "teething", which from case to case could include serious stuff or at least it is perceived as serious by a new owner, especially if it is his first Mog.

Nevertheless on some areas Morgan could do better to give a more positive first impression to the lucky and proud first owner.