|
Forums39
Topics49,859
Posts837,479
Members9,596
| |
Most Online1,063
Jun 14th, 2026
|
|
|
There are no members with birthdays on this day. |
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,945 Likes: 28
Charter Member
|
Charter Member
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 5,945 Likes: 28 |
A fine idea in theory, but could they get the production costs low enough to make such a proposition attractive to buyers?
The existing Aero range (even the Aero Plus 8) are eye-wateringly expensive, and the BMW V8 can't be a massive part of that cost over and above a 4 or 6 cylinder unit.
If they can get the list price of an aluminium platform car in under the £40 - 45k price point, which I would think they need to do in order to snag the majority of trad buyers, I'd be amazed.
As we have seen with other Aero models, they might be wonderful cars but the demand just doesn't seem to be there to sustain a production of 10 or 12 cars a week. Start off with the basics. Price and cost arent related. You hope that your price covers your cost and is acceptable, but if you can change £5k for an extra that costs £1 and still sell, then thats what you do. And thats what Morgan do. Speccing up a new trad you are unlikely to end up much less than £45k, which is pretty expensive compared to the range of much more sophisticated, better engineered cars you can buy for £15k. Nevertheless MMC are selling mainly in the £50k to £100k range for coach built special interest cars. They arent competing with Hyundai. Regulations and standards come into the equation. I dont know the details of the motor industry ones but you can be pretty sure that MMC wont be allowed to continue selling cars built to completely outdated safety standards. Nor will the public accept it. As for costs, no way can the cost of a solid rear axle with drum brakes be any less than an independant disc braked system. All the modern parts can be cannibalised from the mass manufacturer ranges. The cost issue is much more likely to be one of tooling up and to a large degree thats been bought already with the Plus 8. I would have thought that MMC would only win from taking the Plus 8 structure and fitting it with the 3 cylinder Ford Eco engine at the bottom of the Range, and with a 2 litre 4 pot in the middle. The Plus 8 will have to lose its 8 sometime soon so you could end up with a 4 car range - the 3cyl, the 4 pot, the plus 8 and the Aero. It would make an awful lot of business sense and since you still have a "Trad looking" range, I cant see that MMC would lose their niche. And it would give an opportunity for MMC to modernise a currently laughable production process and quality standards.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 517
Talk Morgan Regular
|
|
OP
Talk Morgan Regular
Joined: Mar 2013
Posts: 517 |
A fine idea in theory, but could they get the production costs low enough to make such a proposition attractive to buyers?
The existing Aero range (even the Aero Plus 8) are eye-wateringly expensive, and the BMW V8 can't be a massive part of that cost over and above a 4 or 6 cylinder unit.
If they can get the list price of an aluminium platform car in under the £40 - 45k price point, which I would think they need to do in order to snag the majority of trad buyers, I'd be amazed.
As we have seen with other Aero models, they might be wonderful cars but the demand just doesn't seem to be there to sustain a production of 10 or 12 cars a week. Start off with the basics. Price and cost arent related. You hope that your price covers your cost and is acceptable, but if you can change £5k for an extra that costs £1 and still sell, then thats what you do. And thats what Morgan do. Speccing up a new trad you are unlikely to end up much less than £45k, which is pretty expensive compared to the range of much more sophisticated, better engineered cars you can buy for £15k. Nevertheless MMC are selling mainly in the £50k to £100k range for coach built special interest cars. They arent competing with Hyundai. Regulations and standards come into the equation. I dont know the details of the motor industry ones but you can be pretty sure that MMC wont be allowed to continue selling cars built to completely outdated safety standards. Nor will the public accept it. As for costs, no way can the cost of a solid rear axle with drum brakes be any less than an independant disc braked system. All the modern parts can be cannibalised from the mass manufacturer ranges. The cost issue is much more likely to be one of tooling up and to a large degree thats been bought already with the Plus 8. I would have thought that MMC would only win from taking the Plus 8 structure and fitting it with the 3 cylinder Ford Eco engine at the bottom of the Range, and with a 2 litre 4 pot in the middle. The Plus 8 will have to lose its 8 sometime soon so you could end up with a 4 car range - the 3cyl, the 4 pot, the plus 8 and the Aero. It would make an awful lot of business sense and since you still have a "Trad looking" range, I cant see that MMC would lose their niche. And it would give an opportunity for MMC to modernise a currently laughable production process and quality standards. Interesting Howard those were my thoughts. Car manufacturers biggest cost seem to be the chassis which is why so many makers share. Morgan has the chassis from which it has developed the +8. The 4/4, +4 and possibly Roadster need a slimmer body and wheels. If it handles like a Lotus I will not complain and neither would the reviewers.
Titus
2007 +4 4 seater
2017 Mini Cooper
2007 VW Camper
1996 Honda TRX300
2012 Husqvarna 216
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,575 Likes: 55
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
|
|
Talk Morgan Enthusiast
Joined: Aug 2015
Posts: 1,575 Likes: 55 |
It's the only thing I would change my +4 for. As long as it has a tad more ground clearance!
Morgan Plus 4
Royal Enfield Classic 350
Brompton M6L
Giant TCX Advanced
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,257 Likes: 317
Scruffy Oik Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Scruffy Oik Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 12,257 Likes: 317 |
Start off with the basics. Price and cost arent related. You hope that your price covers your cost and is acceptable, but if you can change £5k for an extra that costs £1 and still sell, then thats what you do.
And thats what Morgan do. Speccing up a new trad you are unlikely to end up much less than £45k, which is pretty expensive compared to the range of much more sophisticated, better engineered cars you can buy for £15k. Nevertheless MMC are selling mainly in the £50k to £100k range for coach built special interest cars. They arent competing with Hyundai.
Regulations and standards come into the equation. I dont know the details of the motor industry ones but you can be pretty sure that MMC wont be allowed to continue selling cars built to completely outdated safety standards. Nor will the public accept it.
As for costs, no way can the cost of a solid rear axle with drum brakes be any less than an independant disc braked system. All the modern parts can be cannibalised from the mass manufacturer ranges. The cost issue is much more likely to be one of tooling up and to a large degree thats been bought already with the Plus 8.
I would have thought that MMC would only win from taking the Plus 8 structure and fitting it with the 3 cylinder Ford Eco engine at the bottom of the Range, and with a 2 litre 4 pot in the middle. The Plus 8 will have to lose its 8 sometime soon so you could end up with a 4 car range - the 3cyl, the 4 pot, the plus 8 and the Aero.
It would make an awful lot of business sense and since you still have a "Trad looking" range, I cant see that MMC would lose their niche. And it would give an opportunity for MMC to modernise a currently laughable production process and quality standards.
I accept the validity of your argument from a theoretical point of view, but if it were truly the case that Morgan production costs are way less than their revenues, why aren't they making more profit? 750 cars per year at an average of say £40k is a gross income of £30m a year. I know the employees are well paid, and quite right too, but there's only 150 or so of them. I'm sure the shareholders aren't bleeding the company dry, quite the reverse, and I realise that fixed costs and R&D are high. Notwithstanding this the 2013 reported accounts show Revenue of a smidgeon over £23m (which implies that sales are biased very heavily towards the lower end of the price range rather than your £50+ estimate) against Cost of Sales of £19m. I'm no accountant, but this hardly seems to me to be a picture of a company which can turn out their product as cheap as chips but is charging whatever the market will bear. Don't get me wrong, I think the idea of a smaller Aero platform is a great idea, I'm just worried they won't be able to do it cheaply enough.
Tim H.
1986 4/4 VVTi Sport, 2002 LR Defender, 2022 Mini Cooper SE
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,549 Likes: 67
Charter Member
|
|
Charter Member
Joined: Jan 2011
Posts: 5,549 Likes: 67 |
Howard makes some very astute observations and I for one tend to feel that a common chassis is inevitable, but will the current demo graph want to buy something that would be akin to a Lotus but with an old fashioned body? I know it works for the +8 but surely that's all about the engine plus it is cheaper (or less expensive) than the Aero. I wouldn't buy one as I feel it will have lost it's inherent Morgan character. At this time, a well equipped +4 will cost close to £50,000.00 which is encroaching on "F" Type territory. Does the panel think that by using common under pining's MSCC could get the price down to somewhere near £40,000.00 and put some real quality into the product but without loosing the "feel" for the road that we all enjoy? 
Here for a good time not a long time!!
Reg
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,550 Likes: 5
Talk Morgan Addict
|
|
Talk Morgan Addict
Joined: Apr 2014
Posts: 3,550 Likes: 5 |
Given that the old chassis was circa £800 and the Aero chassis about £23,000 from what I have been previously told , then they would have to bring that in house surely?
Or simply just add 22k + to the price of any present trad even before they started with the other gear.
Mark - No Longer driving Archie the Old English Sheep Mog........... 2010 Roadster 3.0 V6 (S3) 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,824 Likes: 69
Talk Morgan Addict
|
|
Talk Morgan Addict
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 3,824 Likes: 69 |
Where does the figure of 750 cars come from? That's 14 or more a week.......I thought they'd never even got to 10 a week. Interestingly a 23mill turnover divided by 50t equals about 8 cars a week.......
Or does the 3 wheeler skew all my figures? But that's only 35t isn't it?
Anyone know how many trads are made each week? I always understood the 4/4 was the lion's share or has the plus 4 overtaken it (see what I did there?)
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 431
Learner Plates Off!
|
|
Learner Plates Off!
Joined: Jun 2015
Posts: 431 |
Interesting comments about the trade future. I bought one because it isn't a replica of anything it's a car that's been in continuous production for decades. Bit like the old indian Enfield and even the caterham.
The driving experience is unique as it's still running on a chassis and suspension largely unchanged since the fifties. Were it to have the underpinnings of a modern car it would lose this heritage.
I think Morgan would still sell them but I am sure the motoring press would be less lenient and start comparisons with modern sports cars and potentially shine some light on the hand built quality.....
It would be a real shame to see the trad go in its current format but perhaps it's time to change if they want to appeal to a wider market.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,562 Likes: 12
Talk Morgan Addict
|
|
Talk Morgan Addict
Joined: Oct 2011
Posts: 3,562 Likes: 12 |
Of course, the aluminium chassis isn't the only way of doing it. If they can't do a ladder frame, as now, and the bonded aluminium is too expensive, and they certainly wouldn't or couldn't produce a monocoque, then why couldn't they look at other traditional forms of chassis. The obvious one would be the triangulated small tube type, beloved of so many kit cars, mainly because of its' enherant ease to produce and low cost?
They could make it fit the existing body size, wood and all. If they really wanted to, they could even use the trad. suspension, but I can't see any point.
Paul
[At last, I have a car I can polish]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 22,358 Likes: 353
Roadster Guru Member of the Inner Circle
|
|
Roadster Guru Member of the Inner Circle
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 22,358 Likes: 353 |
The alchemy required to convert a current trad into an 'acceptable' modern trad may not be possible.
I certainly don't want an MX5 with a Morgan badge on the front. I'm even less keen on something which could possibly have a BMW engine, and although the idea of a hybrid has some appeal, I can't see that this will work effectively with low mileage and standing idle for long periods.
I suspect that if this transition is successful, it will be unattractive to current trad buyers, but attract a whole new demographic.
DaveW
'05 Red Roadster S1
'16 Yellow (Not the only) Narrow AR GDI Plus 4
|
|
|
|
|
