Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Classic Morgans (pre-CX) Roadster- - To buy or not to buy?

"The real reason I bought the Roadster was to get rid of my awful ARP4.
What a dreadful car (sorry Paul)!"

That's all right Eddie, however with around 6500 miles on the clock, including a couple of thousand miles through France earlier this year, the engine is definitely getting better, especially in that flat mid range area between 2500 - 4000 revs. There is less need to change down for some meaningful acceleration, and, having fitted a longer silencer, from a Caterham, the noise is far less intrusive, although still louder than a factory standard Plus 4 exhaust system.

Interestingly I had a chance to have a back to back test drive of all three trads. last week at Krazy Horse and I actually liked the little Sigma engined 4/4 best, and, with a bit of tuning to say, 250bhp this could be a real flyer.

Whether one should "invest" in a new Roadster however, only the individual can determine. This forums' advice is all about 'man maths,' which I am sure we all know about?

"Interestingly I had a chance to have a back to back test drive of all three trads. last week at Krazy Horse and I actually liked the little Sigma engined 4/4 best, and, with a bit of tuning to say, 250bhp this could be a real flyer"

What made the 4/4 Sigma your favorite over the others you tested Paul?

I would imagine that it would not be that easy to get 250bhp out of the sigma 1.6. My feeling is that you would finish up with a track day or race engine that would not be that practical for road use: not much torque at low revs. Also to cope with that output you would need to upgrade the wheels and tyres.

The thing is that the 4/4 comes in a package that really is the traditional classic British sports car. Light weight, chuckable, fun to drive because the narrow tyres allow controlled slides and drifts because they are well balanced to the power, etc. and not necessarily all that fast. Just quick acceleration, good handling and above all feels fast when not being too ridiculous.

Lets face it, a car that can do over 300 kph is only really good for bragging rights.

Start down the road of heavily tuning a 4/4 and you finish up with something else. It would finish up being the 1.6 litre version of the Baby Doll. That may be what you want, if so have fun.

I quite agree, Peter. My 4/4 doesn't have a Sigma engine, but at 165bhp I feel it gives plenty of usable performance that doesn't overwhelm the chassis and tyres.

I prefer a car in which I can drive enthusiastically and in which I can provoke a power oversteer when I try, rather than a car in which I'm always having to be careful and might power oversteer if I'm inattentive.

You have to push the Roadster quite hard to misbehave. Below 3000 rpm it is a pussy cat.

It makes a great tourer.

I'm sure it does, John, but it does have 3 litres to deliver its power, and ginormously wide tyres compared to a 4/4. Getting all that power out of 1600cc means massive revs and a peaky delivery. Couple that with 165 section tyres and however much fun it is, it's never going to be described as a great tourer.

To get interesting power from the Sigma engine, one would have to use the Eco boost option, but good power from these starts at 268bhp @ 6250 with 257lbs/ft @ 3000 going up to a massive 354bhp @6500 with 327lbs/ft at only 3300 and even as low as 2759rpm it is producing 235 lbs/ft. As far as I can find out, the Roadster 'only' has 280bhp at 6000rpm and 280lbs/ft.

Those are truly impressive figures. Can you imagine that little engine in the 4/4? Suitably upgraded of course, but not stupidly so. See here: http://www.sbdev.co.uk/EcoBoost/EcoBoost_information.html

Start down the road of heavily tuning a 4/4 and you finish up with something else. It would finish up being the 1.6 litre version of the Baby Doll. That may be what you want, if so have fun.

Actually, because todays modern engines are so far ahead of anything else we've had, more efficient and smaller, I don't think this would be the case Peter, with traditional tuning, such as you've done with your car, you are right, but modern torque strong, small turbo engines are just so different.

With that sort of torque and the low weight of the 4/4, it would be even better than the roadster I fancy, and probably for less money. Ken, how about it?

BTW, I heard a whisper the other day, that the factory were considering a limited run of ARP4 style cars, with coil spring rear suspension, but fitted with the 3.7 Cyclone engine and different trim. This could be way off the mark of course, but it will be interesting to see if this finally materialises.

"The thing is that the 4/4 comes in a package that really is the traditional classic British sports car. Light weight, chuckable, fun to drive because the narrow tyres allow controlled slides and drifts because they are well balanced to the power, etc. and not necessarily all that fast. Just quick acceleration, good handling and above all feels fast when not being too ridiculous."

Peter - that excellent description should be on the MMC & Dealer web sites...bang on!! Well done - you are a great writer!

Narrow bodied Plus 4.

An Eco boost Sigma engined car has got to be even lighter Dave?