1) A "real" MG should have a build date of no later than about 1938.
2) A "real" MG should not put out more than 3 (three) BHP.
3) A "real" MG should have a 0-60 time of more than a fortnight (if indeed they can reach it at all).
There are also others who firmly believe the MGC was the last "real" MG.
Things change. If people can't accept this, that's their loss.
As a Maestro/Montego owner is the past I am well aware of the old guard attitude!. Even the MGOC and MGOC were very slow in accepting the MGs of the 80's. It will be interesting to see if Zed owners will agree with the view of some enthusiasts that the MG saloons of the 80s did not deserve the MG badge?
The mistake of the 80's cars was that they were called Metro, Maestro and Montego, they should have called them something else, in truth the later Maestro EFi was a very good MG, because there was no Austin equivalent. It should be remembered that in the 60's we did have the MG 11 & 1300, so to knock the 80's cars is to knock the small 60's MG saloons.
Alas, there is a great deal of <<ageism>> in the MGOC and MGCC, which I have experienced first hand on FWD and even the MGF, which came with free MGCC in 1997. I attended several MGCC natters, where I was made to feel really unwelcome - they generally only considered pre-rubber bumper MGBs to be real MGs.
Times have changed, and the MGF is now accepted (because it's older?). However, FWD never really have gained widespread acceptance, which is a shame since the Maestros (I've had two 2.0i) were very underrated cars.
However, there is one natter in Hampshire (Phoenix, Hartley Wintney) on tonight (and every 2nd Friday in the month), where all MG enthusiasts are welcomed, whether their car is FWD or prewar. I'll be there tonight, in either my ZTT or Audi TT (they even welcome non-MGs).
If you ask me I think the new "Z" range of MG's is closer to the roots of MG than most people realise. MG initally produced uprated versions of their parent company, Morris. Morris may have disapeared in the slow merging of companies, but today MG are doing almost exactly what they did in the beginning, producing sporty derivatives of their parent companies cars.
I remember my test drive of the ZS, I wanted to buy a British car but I was blown away that I could buy a GREAT British car. The chassis engineers did a excellent job, part of the fun of the car is listening to that engine. People that have driven MG's know. I like that. I don't want to be driving around in a car as common as a B*W thinking I have some kind of exclusivity.
Of course it isn't a reworked Austin of nearly a century ago - but a high quality badge engineered Rover of today. We all know this - Monogram proves this as you can now spec your ZT - with virtual R75 interior.
What we do know is that MGR's marketing men have got it right. The MG derivatives of Rover cars have been well thought out and are now immensely desirable. Suspension and engine tweaks are exemplorary.
To harp on about yesterdays MG's is irrelevent. What will the future bring: we know that the "Ultimate" MG models are around the corner - this is when MG will lite up the sky.
ZS230 - ZT260/385 and with RWD. X80 and whatever other surprises they may have in store for us.
Historically all todays MGR's are renamed Austins, Longbridge is the home of Austin, not MG or Rover. I think if the MG's are made in England and UK owned, and have an MG badge on, then they are proper MG's.