Talk Morgan Forums Morgan Sports Cars Classic Morgans (pre-CX) Monty Takes A Deep Breath

I really enjoyed your post John. It really is great that the new cars evoke just as much affection as the older cars. I have had several periods when my mog was my daily car (as it is at the moment) and I'm sure that if I were in my thirties now and using it everyday, I would be looking at the plus four, for sure.
My comments were made in the context of upgrading a trad (see thread title ) not cx v trad.
I was meaning that I admire the skill, effort and work of those that upgrade but that for me, at my age, I'm happy just to use the more or less standard car.
Long live the new cars!

Nick and Julian,


Typical thread drift as always, please don't see this as Trad vs CX, there are without question aspects of the trad I do miss, it's slightly more raw and vintage feel. I'm fortunate that my CX is pre traction control, as I still get some of that twitchiness of the trad especially in the wet,compared to the later more planted CX's.I also get to enjoy the varnished wood dashboard and steering wheel etc.that I've always loved and associated with a Morgan.

What I don't miss is the trad. engine heat sink on a hot summers day etc. I did consider getting a Works Edition Plus 4 as well, but the GDI bit made me a little less certain as to how wise that maybe longer term. If it wasn't an issue with the short doors, I'd go for a really early 86 onwards 4/4 with the CVH engine and 5 speed to keep the CX company. Very simple car, very reliable simple mechanics, electrics etc. just slightly bouncy lever arm suspension, requiring less hands on maintence compared to some of the later cars.......just to keep the Morgan experience a little bit more raw.

I can understand the above improvements being made and why, but it in part, for me that sometimes feels it's changing the core values and attributes of a specific model, and therefore it's unique Morganess, warts and all, but some would quite rightly argue changes for the better.. I'm of the school that loves something for what it is 'warts and all' and not for what it could be. But there's nothing wrong with building on and refinig the base car, as they say it's the journey rather than the destination. I like Morgan's standard querkiness, it's ablities and limitations, and just prefer to make the standard car work well and reliably and enjoy it for what it is,

Everything so true here, like defender owners LR barely up graded since 1958 until suddenly the new defender hit the market with all the tech in the 20's. This was a massive step change for the traditional owner to get their head around! Like a few of you here I can see both generations special merits. One thing I really like about CX and beyond is the fact that you don't have wood where it will suffer rot from water ingress and that is very important when longevity of ownership is to be considered. No huge bill for a foot of timber!

At this time I am where Julian is, still enjoying that raw old school drive that the classic offers and yes.... working on the car too. I'm hoping to keep on with this until the Hearse is the next classic drive! Where I currently drive and the sort of driving I do which satisfies my needs around where I live is all I need at the moment. In the wilds of North Wales with the moors and empty roads we often see more mogs than any other cars as so many travel here to enjoy them as well. I still don't think I want a CX... I'm hoping I don't need to consider it either but I suppose there is that 1% chance that I still want to drive a mog but just can't manage my current and much loved plus 4.

Sewin, so true of the earlier trads, woodwork disintegrating ,chassis and inner wing corrosion and so on, which for many later trads is a thing of the past, ie. the prospect of required rebuilds as with earlier cars. Hence my choice of post 86 but pre EFi CVH, cars that benefitted from treatment of the wood, painting the wings off the cars etc that improved their longevity compared with the past. They still had the front oiler setup, whcih allowed you at a stretch to delay the necessary greasing, whist still on tour.


If I could find one rust proofed from new and before the engine complications of fuel injection with it's, cats and sensors, it would be my ideal Sunday drive car.......leave the roof off and less of a issue with the short door for getting in and out.......

So I asked AI for its view and guess what

AI Overview

The sweet spot for a Morgan 4/4 that perfectly balances longevity, reliability, and ultimate mechanical/electrical simplicity is the 1986 to 1991 production run (Morgan 4/4 1600). If you are willing to trade a tiny amount of mechanical simplicity for a massive jump in modern engine reliability and longevity, the 1993 to 2005 Ford Zetec era is your next best choice.
The breakdown of the eras explains why certain years fit your specific requirements.

1. The Sweet Spot: 1986–1991 (Ford CVH / 5-Speed)

This era represents the absolute peak of Morgan simplicity paired with modern anti-rot treatments.

The Longevity (Crucial Morgan Update): Prior to 1986, Morgan ash wood frames were untreated raw timber. In 1986, Morgan finally introduced standard Cuprinol wood preservation treatment and better rust prevention for the steel chassis. This means cars built from 1986 onward have vastly superior body and frame longevity.

Mechanical Simplicity: These cars are equipped with the 1.6-litre Ford CVH engine (sourced from the Ford Escort). It uses a single, highly reliable carburetor. Anyone with a basic set of wrenches can service it, and mechanical parts are incredibly cheap and abundant.
The Gearbox: Unlike older versions with finicky 4-speeds, this era features the bulletproof Ford Type 9 5-speed manual gearbox, widely regarded as one of the most reliable and easy-to-maintain gearboxes ever built.
Electrical Simplicity: There are no computers, no electronic fuel injection (EFI), no ECUs, and no complex wiring harnesses. The dashboard consists of basic, individually wired analog gauges..

The Runner Up: 1993–2005 Ford Zetec 1.8L

)If you want a car you can comfortably drive across continents without thinking twice about points, condensers, or tuning a carburetor, look at the Zetec-powered era.
The Longevity:
These cars feature fully treated woodwork and galvanized steel chassis options, making them highly resilient against the elements.

The Reliability: The 1.8-litre Ford Zetec engine is arguably the most robust engine ever placed in a 4/4. It easily runs past 150,000 miles with basic oil changes.

The Trade-off: It introduces electronic fuel injection and a basic engine management ECU. While it decreases absolute electrical simplicity, the system is primitive by modern standards, highly stable, and rarely fails

.Direct Comparison of Eras

Engine & GearboxProsCons (Complexity Risks)

1968–1981Ford Kent 1600 4-Speed / Early 5-SpeedUltimate visual simplicity; legendary "Crossflow" engine.No factory wood treatment. 4-speed gearboxes are less highway-friendly.

1986–1991 (Recommended)Ford CVH 1.6L Ford Type 9 5-SpeedFactory wood treatment; bulletproof 5-speed; zero computers; point-and-click mechanical repair.Carburetors require occasional manual adjustment.

1993–2005 Ford Zetec 1.8L 5-SpeedTurn-key reliability; excellent power-to-weight; great longevity.Introduces a basic ECU and fuel injection.

2006–2018 Ford Duratec / Sigma Mazda 5-Speed. Most modern and powerful.Too complex. Multi-layered electronics, catalytic converters, and modern wiring harnesses.

Summary Recommendation

Look for a 1986–1991 model if your goal is an analog vehicle you can fix on the side of the road with basic tools. If you prioritize an engine that never needs tuning and starts perfectly every single morning, opt for a 1993–1999 Zetec model (pre-dating the 1999/2000 dashboard and steering upgrades).

I've been studying runner length today, and the results are quite revealing. I've crunched some numbers via a few runner length calcuators, and assuming we're keeping Monty under 8,000rpm, which we are, the optimal runner lenth that keeps coming up, is... 300mm.

However, there's under-bonnet packaging to consider too, for example there's no way on God's earth we're fitting 300mm long ITBs under Monty's bonnet, even with a bonnet scoop! Having measured up today, the maximum runner length of a set of Jenvey individual throttle bodies fitted with a low profile foam air cleaner, that would fit and still allow me to close Monty's bonnet, are 160mm, so a long way off 300mm!

I've also just measured the long curved runners on my Fusion Fabrications inlet, they're 370mm, all the evidence suggest they're perfect if you want to stay under 5,800rpm, but they're 70mm too long for an engine we want to keep making power out to 7,800 rpm.

To make the evaluation of all the induction options more clear, I've created the following table.



And assuming we can make it fit and still close Monty's bonnet, it does seem like the Fab9 Elite Manifold would be the ultimate compromise.



It theory, it should give us this.





Monty should retain his excellent mid-range punch, but at that same time now keep piling on the horsepower from 5,500 rpm out to 7,800 rpm tops where he'll be making somewhere between 210hp - 220hp. I now think the Fab9 Elite intake is the way forward, but fitting it without a bonnet scoop is looking like it'll be very touch and go!

Have you considered a bonnet extension kit similar to Librands or have something made to lift the bonnet out more. It may save you having to modify the bonnet https://www.librands.co.uk/products-view-238.html

John H. Yes I am fully in agreement with you there, The 80's non injected CVH is something special. Lightnes and a positive drive is stunning and the non injection engine is far superior to the later injected option .. at Ford by this time the Escort had been injection for some time but the XR2 still had the original non injected engine but now with the 5 speed box. So in true Morgan style they had the twin choke down draught carb and what a sublime engine. I have looked from time to time but have never found an example I'd be happy with but yes it is the one to have!

Hi John, the challenging area is the leading edge of the bonnet, not the trailing edge. I need all 180mm but this falls to 150mm due to the bonnet taper



TBH it's the same challenge as fitting ITBs, only less extreme, Morgan solved that one with a bonnet scoop, which I'd be happy with if it was'nt for the cost of having one made, and painted.

It's very close, but currently looking like Monty's bonnet will foul on the Fab9 Elite's throttle body.



And foul it before I can engage the front catch, my calculations say I only need 30mm more clearance, but the manifold really wants trial fitting before I know for fure?

John, having presented the case for appreciation for the modernisation of the automobile of and the regulations that created things as they are.... It seems you may have come late to my way of thinking of at least 20+ years ago when I bought into my 1986 +8 is on carbs and of the design era which it now seems you may be promoting to some degree....In terms of my car, having been stripped at 8k miles by a well known garage business owner and rebuilt to meet his exacting standards....it has indeed toured Southern Europe on more than one occasion. (-: Finding grease to refill the gun in an Italian petrol station was an interesting rip-off experience, but needs must, I well remember when staying at an agriturismo in Tuscany, lying on the deck grease gun in hand an American artist, introduced himself, and asked what was I doing, and being surprised that any car of that vintage still required such activities over so few miles... (-: Yup old guys in old Morgans ever have plenty of stories to tell...(-:

As for CX Vs Trad.... not an issue for me, I like the idea that Morgan has found a way to keep the the works producing Morgans of any type keeping those craftsmen and women in gainful employment. I guess around the time that the +8 came on line there would be those who criticised it just as I suspect there were those who thought things had gone to pot when the fourth wheel was added... (-:..?

Dave sorry to further indulge within your highly technical modifications thread... If Bill Fink could fit an LS engine into a Mog, I have every confidence that you will achieve your objectives in one form or another, power to your elbow..

The Fab9 Elite is a two part design with a plenum that tapers smaller towards the opposite end to the throttle body. The 10 bolt flange that allows you access to the inside of the plenum looks symetrical to me, so in theory you could rverse the plenum/throttle-body orientation relative to the four runners.

This reversal idea is an interesting possibility for Monty, with the throttle body at the opposire end and now facing to to the rear, the plenum taper works with Monty's natural bonnet taper, rather than against it.

However, the next challenge would be having sufficient space to fit an air filter to the now rearward facing throttly body. TBH, a forward facing throttle body would be a superior setup for a number of reasons, so it's really down to the bonnet to throttle body clearance, or just fixing that issue if it arrises with an expensive Supersport bonnet scoop.