MGB vs Fiat 124

Fiat.

I love both, but I'm on a simplicity kick right now, so the MGB would beat the 124. That said, I really dislike almost every interior to come out of Abingdon after 1967. The Morris Garages appear to have separate departments for the design of front and rear wheel arches. The 124 has one of my favorite interiors ever. There is an understated bit of class mixed with what appears to be a disinterest in doing things that cannot be done properly within space and budget. The inside of the 124 just looks like a better space to spend time.

The one insignificant area where the MG really wins is in the tail light department.

Pininfarina should have been given a stern talking to about this. When they designed the spider they just slapped the 124 berlina tails on it, seemingly without any thought as to whether or not it looked right.

And to add insult to injury when they finally got around to "improving" them (federal mandate maybe?) All they did was make 'em bigger and shoot for "close enough" to the shape of the car.

At least when Fiat paid Bertone to design convertible versions of their sedans they spec'ed tail lights that actually fit and compliment the lines of the car.

The early MGB's however have some of the nicest looking tails to grace the ass end of any car.

You do make a curiously astute point about the taillamps. Never thought about it. I spent enough time trying to find good replacements and get them to work right back in the days when you couldn't get anything older than a 1976 version.

In Fiat/Pininfarina's defense, they did do it right up to that point. The preceding 1200/1500 had MGB-like taillamps. They came out in 1959, so Morris Garages simply copied a good design.

In 1959, the MGA had these hideous afterthoughts screwed to the rear wings:

I always want what's not in the garage - it's a sickness

I have both right now.

There's no doubt that the Fiat is more modern in specs -- 5 speed, dohc, 4-wheel discs. It's a more competent cruiser, has a bigger trunk, has a (make-believe) back seat. The top is a very, very good mechanism. One-hand operation.

But, as various folks above have mentioned, there are a couple of areas where the MGB just feels perfect. The steering -- the MGB has a very nice rack and pinion; the Fiat a very dead-feeling recirculating ball. The shifter -- the MG is all metal-to metal, bar one very thin hard nylon sleeve at the base of the shift lever. The Fiat has lots of rubber and is a lot more vague. The brakes -- the B has unassisted discs/drums (up to 74 or so, when they got a booster). Again, the feel is great. The overboosted Fiat, not so much.

The Fiat is a very nice car to drive. But the MG... well, sometimes it's just perfect.

here is the car the Fiat 124's design is based on. It was the car Tom Tajaarda designed before the fiat.

Corvette Rondine

Overboosted Fiat brakes? I'd call them a lot of things (usually while working on them), but that's not a adjective I'd associate to anything but an American car. I just found them 'barely adequate', proof that disc brakes don't automatically mean superior stopping power. Unless you're talking about a Mini, then they do.

I believe I have heard that term before in regards to fiat 124 brakes... but that was an auto test done 40 years ago... back before power assisted brakes were all that common.

Now fiat 124 handbrakes really suck

MGB if it is a GT or V8 if not Fiat.

I miss my old 124 Spider. Mine was a great car, and the model was advanced for its day.

Plus it wins on the fact that its drivetrain made an appearance in Morgans for a while. Can anyone think of an Italian car that used a British engine?

GTV6..... um, err... oops

aussiesmg wrote: GTV6..... um, err... oops

Has anyone put a GTV-6 engine into a Fiat 124?