Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Morgan Plus Four, Supersport & Plus Six (CX & CXV Generation Vehicles) Supersport now available in the US

The CXV chassis is heavier than the CX. In CX form the 4 is 253bhp/tonne and the 6 is 317 and 100 kilos heavier. I think the US would see the bigger engine as more appealing.

I can only think it is type approval, or BMW licensing restriction that would stop the factory offering the 6cyl.

It's type approval, however there are differences with the UK engine

US Plus Four: Uses the BMW B46 engine. This is the US-emissions-compliant variant of BMW's 2.0-liter TwinPower Turbo four-cylinder.

UK Plus Four: Uses the BMW B48 engine. This is the European equivalent, which delivers the exact same output: 255 bhp and up to 295 lb-ft of torque

Comparing the two bonded-aluminum structures:CX Platform weighs 97 kg (214 lbs).CXV Platform: weighs 102 kg. While this is technically 5 kg (11 lbs) heavier, .Regarding rigidity, the CXV offers a 10% increase in torsional rigidity and up to a 100% increase in stiffness at certain suspension mounting points, where it really matters, so the 5 kg weight penalty is a very small price to pay the added stiffness and resultant improvements in handling utilising the CXV chassis plus the benefit of a better door arrangement..

With 4 cylinders it's a Supersport in name only, I don't think the Yanks will fall for it.

For me the interior of the SS feels a level above the P4, doors too
If they would offer the SS in the EU with a 4cyl besides the 6cyl, I would go for the smaller engined one!!

I recently saw that the B48 engined Toyota Supra was part of a recall, 2019-2022, after some engine fires starting from water ingress into the starter motor. I'm not sure if this is exactly the same engine as Plus Four?

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a68076611/toyota-supra-bmw-x3-3-series-engine-fire-risk-recall

Which sadly, it never will be. By which I mean we'll never be offered the SS with the B48 and even if we did, it wouldn't be a reasonable price.

Morgans may seem expensive, they are hand built and in reality, they are massive loss leaders for the factory

A quick AI generation of the breakdown of costs/revenue in building a Morgan

The company generated £48.9 million in gross revenue during its latest primary reporting year.Annual Production Volume: Morgan operates as an official "micro-manufacturer," building roughly 630 to 650 vehicles per year.

The Raw Average: Dividing £48.9 million by 640 vehicles yields a macro-average transaction value of £76,406 per car produced

The average total operating cost at the Morgan factory is approximately £111,000 to £118,000 per car produced


Of which the estimated payroll budget cost alone per car produced at Morgan is between £12,000 and £14,300.very high because of the low volume hand produced labour intensive nature of a Morgan

When looking at the UK average retail price paid for say a Morgan Plus Four, Vat alone would be about £!4000 of it

WIth a 6% to 8% of the net retail price,dealer gross profit would translate to roughly £3,800 to £5,000 of the retail sales price.

So about £18 to 20k of the Retail sales price of a Plus Four, Morgan doesn't retain or benefit from


I'm surprised Morgan is still here making cars and there's only one way prices must go and thats upward in order to survive, although a major increases in production levels may ease the losses, all my recent factory vists through my eyes demonstrate to me a lack of production space and capacity to grow that much bigger. So unless they build smarter eg subcontact some part of the build to outsiders, capacity to grow seems limited as most likely does the total world wide demand for Morgan. They could perhaps also release other areas of the factory eg stores for production, eg relocate in off site then operate a JIT parts delivery to the factory floor, but thats getting quite sophisticated for Morgan.

Hence the need for one-off high value limited production of the likes of the MIdsummer and now the Coupe that wont stretch manufacturing capacity, but significantly raise the average unit revenues and in fact maybe the way forward for Morgan ie high value, low volume exclusive limited runs.

In the 80’s the 911 Turbo didn’t meet emissions regs in the states so couldn’t be sold. The Americans wanted the wide body “turbo look” so Porsche removed the turbo and kept all the other updated features of the full fat turbo.

The Supersport!

And in many ways it was a better car to drive than the Turbo, and certainly better than the Carrera for the wider rear wheels and the whale tail on the back keeping it more firmly pinned to the road. The 930 Turbo didn't get the 5 speed G50 gearbox until the last year of production, ie 1989, the 4 speeder was not good by comparison. The Supersport got the G50 box from the '87 model year that is September 86 and that gearbox made a massive difference to how it drove.

If the Supersport was being sold in the USA with the inline-Six and MMC chose not to sell the Supersport 400, but sold the standard car with the 400s visual elements, I'd be inclined to agree.

However, it feels more like 911 vs 912 to me. And, that isn't to say the 912 is a bad vehicle because there are many who argue it is better balanced than a 911 from the same era; however, there is no escaping even though they look the similar, they aren't the same cars, and that is down to the engine.