Funny thing about coincidences, is that they come along together. Mind you, if they didn’t, nobody would recognise them for what they are.
Ah wis goin’ through some photos while emptying a memory stick last week, an ah stumbled over pictures from the Glamis Transport Extravaganza, back in July. As well as boring Mrs.P with “ah used tae huv one o’ those”, sporadically, it was nice to see all those cars from ‘the golden age of British motoring‘ before exotic foreign concepts like reliability took root (or should that be Rootes).
An’ then in Sunday’s paper (MG6_Scotland on Sunday_27oct13), I came across an article about the ‘new’ MG6. Hardly glowing praise. It’s difficult to know if the car merits the criticism, or if everyone’s jumping on the bandwagon. (Personally, I think jumping on a Volkswagen might be more fun). Jellybear Clarkson’s piece on this is in a similar vein.
It was easy, and very popular (still is, apparantly) to kick MGRover when it was down, and on the point of collapse. The irony in the newspaper article was in starting the piece stating that the Rover75 was an underrated car. At the time, the 75 was always less favourably compared against the latest BMW (who owned Rover at the time). Don’t you think it’s just a wee bit late for the motoring press to now admit that the R75 was kind of maybe actually OK -ish, now that the factories and the jobs have gone, and we’re all (mostly) driving non-descript motors. I once knew a guy who worked for Audi, an’ he drove an old Land-Rover Defender just so that he could find it in the company car park .. true story.
Whatever happened to style ?, which brings me back to Glamis… (cast your eyes over these offerings from this same manufacturer), and then consider the MG6. In today’s competetive global market, the MG6 hardly stands out from the herd, and then there’s the stigma attached to Chinese/Indian manufacturing quality and build standards. Anyone remember the CityRover? The MG6 is a rebadged SAIC Roewe 550, originally a development by Rover based on the R75 prior to the collapse of the company in 2005. British engineering and styling, and assembled at Longbridge using imported Chinese components. All very global and political, but not very exciting.
The MG Icon concept hpowever, looks exciting, and shows that some imagination is still present in the design department, but falls into the trap of trying too hard to incorporate too many features. It has some interesting, ‘quirky’ lines. Frontally it’s got presence. I quite like the rear – bit MGB GT-ish. Definitely eye-catching. The side elevation though, is just awkward, trying to marry the front and rear, with a bit of Range-Rover/Mini coupe slopy roof line thrown in, and then there are the rear wheel arches. Just not right.
It is distinctive, as an MG should be. Which is why I’d have an Icon before I’d have an MG6, but it’snot right. Maybe, if I want a new Bearmobile, I should offer to redesign it for them…. mmm, what d’ye think ? Obviously it’d need to run on Kryofuel (see other blogs) to appeal to all the eco-friendly, polar-bear loving motorists who want to be stylishly green and coool as a turbo-charged cucumber.
However, if SAIC, sorry MG Rover want to lend me a car, I promise to put my rose tinted Gregories on, and not give it as scathing a review. To do this, all I need to do is write. . . nothing. Cunning or wot?
. . . pass me a bottle of your finest Speckled Hen Mrs.P.
Paul R Bear 
