I have had one for 25 years. Now upgraded to a 3.9l high compression engine, with Mazda gearbox ( the original was not strong enough for the power ) and a Panhard rod on the rear axle to limit lateral movement, together with a stiffer anti-roll bar and slight negative camber, 1 degree. It will cruise at French motorway speeds completely unstressed. It was recorded at the Nurburgring at 143 MPH. Peak torque is at 95 MPH ! Two years ago it went to Switzerland, onto Vienna, the Stelvio Pass and Lake Como, from which I drove back in 12 hours. Last year Sardinia and Corsica. Great on long distance and fun in the twisty bits too ! Great video. If you buy one a little bit of sorting out, polly bush, new leaf springs and front coils, together with new dampers will transform them. A little negative camber makes them even sharper.
Back when this was new, this would have been viewed as having an absolutely massive engine. Most people's family car was along the lines of an Austin 1100, Escort 1100/1300 or a 1600 Cortina. Even the Austin 1800/2200 landcrab was viewed as a rather thirsty, big-engined car.
Another enjoyable video, I'd love to do a resto mod BGT. I know you'd lose a lot of the character but swapping in modern brakes/suspension and perhaps Honda S2000 running gear would make a very fast and reliable weekend blaster. I'll go get my flameproof suit and await the responses!
Thank you for watching. Ohh yes, I like the idea of that! The great thing about an MGB is they are still plentiful and so well supported, so the sky is the limit in terms of modifications you can do.
I like your thinking! I really enjoyed my time with the MGB GT V8 and ended up purchasing it. There's plans to slowly improve it over time but for now i'm using it everyday.
0 seconds ago The MGB GT V8 is indeed a very powerful car in the day. A very sad story, in the 70's a friend of mine bought his wife one and it was a beast. Unfortunately she had a fatal rear end shunt with a HGV before they started to put the crash bars as standard on HGV trailers, it was terrible. Her car was wedged underneath the trailer. The accident was attributed to poor braking. I have always wanted a RV8.
Oh that is truly awful. Let me do some digging and see if I can get an RV8 on the channel - it would round things off nicely and go well with some of the other MGs already featured. Thank you for watching.
Great video, I’m enjoying the MGB/C/V8 content. I hope the man maths comes up with the right numbers. I do agree the wind noise can get obtrusive, it’s the same in my BGT. I find rolling the Webasto back and opening the windows makes it more agreeable. Strangely I don’t remember it being an issue when the GT was my daily driver back in the early 90s. I would regularly cover quite big miles including motorway miles without problems, maybe we have just got used to the relative silence of modern cars so notice the noise more nowadays. I’m planning to experiment with some new door seals soon to see if that reduces the wind noise.
Yes, with the top down, wind noise/buffeting on my V8 '75 MG Midget above 25 MPH is kinda bad, as when stock new... cruising around town at 25 MPH with top down is very pleasant, though... considering adding a small 'venturi' as used on boats to direct the wind up above passengers... when younger we ignored all the buffeting, of course...
@@buzzwaldron6195 A V8 Midget !!! Wow that must be down right scary. I don't think I have ever seen a V8 shoe horned into a Midget must be pretty rapid.
@@martinhibbert1428 - Several videos of larger heavier engines into Midgets / Spitfires on UA-cam, but I wanted that lighter simpler V8... Instead of scary, I would say smoooooth compared to that horribly rough running 4... back in 1960's my daily driver was the stock turbocharged Olds 215 version of that Buick 215 in the Jetfire: ua-cam.com/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/v-deo.html
@@buzzwaldron6195 No power steering option from factory, even the RV8 that came 20 years later, didn't get it. Although, there are several aftermarket options available
@@fuelupclassic - I'm in USA, so Brits got things we didn't... such as V8 MGB... or MGs and Triumphs after 1980... we only got TR8... never felt a need for power steering on my '75 MG Midget...
These MG wheels are my favourite ever wheels! They would look good on almost any make of car - but my a dream MG would be the MG MAGNETTE saloon, in a single colour (not 2 tone). The FARINA Magnette, that is!
Disagree about the need for it to look special. I love the understated looks and the discreet V8 badging is spot on in my opinion. Add to that those iconic wheels and you can tell at a glance what you're looking at.
I bought a new Damask Red MGB GT in June 1973 and took delivery on the first of August 1973 on the new M plate. Unfortunately within weeks the V8 was announced which I would have gone for. Nevertheless my 1800 did me well for two years until I bought a new Alfa Spider 2000.
It's a pity MG was stuck with the Range Rover tuned V8, as the Rover (P6B) V8 used by Ken Costello had 155bhp. Still I always lusted after one like many, but couldn't afford one, so ended up going down the 'cheaper' route. I bought a converted GT in 2006, once a 1973 B GT 4-cylinder in Mineral Blue. But what a car, completely stock from the outside down to the rostyles etc no V8 badges. It was a wolf in sheeps clothing. The conversion had been done by an ex (1970s) RAF Lightning jet pilot to an extremely high standard (he was a very talented engineer). He used the even better Rover V8 from an SD1 (better heads) and the LT77 5-speed gearbox. Riding on the original 4-cylinder ride height, it out performed the factory V8 in every way. I miss that car very much. As to your point about the interior being little different in the factory V8 you drove, the speedo and rev counter are smaller diameter and wider apart (look at them in your red GT). This was due to the fitment of a collapsible steering column.
Oh that sounds like great fun and I bet it surprised a few people at the traffic lights! The beauty of the Rover V8 is that it can be tuned relatively easily to make impressive power. Ahh yes! Now you mention it, I can see the slight difference with the dials compared to my BGT.
The Buick 215 made 200 grossHP in stock form in 1963 cars... Olds version of Buick 215 had 215 HP... over 300 HP with exhaust restrictions fixed... ua-cam.com/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/v-deo.html
Horse power ratings for the Buick/Rover V8 were quite different when tested by UK/Euro testers back in the day depending upon what rating was used. The 1960 Buick Special was rated at 157 bhp (gross) at 4600rpm Rover 3.5 L, 160 bhp (net) at 5200 rpm Early Ranger Rover 3.5 L, 135 bhp (net) at 4750 rpm Rover P6B 3500S 3.5 L, 152 bhp (DIN) at 5000 rpm. For the auto version of the P6B, 143 bhp (DIN) at 5000 rpm. MGB GT V8 3.5 L, 137 bhp (DIN) at 5000 rpm Early V8 Land Rover 3.5 L, detuned to 93 bhp (DIN) 3500 rpm Rover Vitesse 3.5 L, 190 bhp (DIN) 5250 rpm And not forgetting the Australian designed 4.4 L (taller block) 195 bhp (gross) at 4250 rpm At the end of the day output figures did differ depending upon what period road tests you read and as said type of rating. But there is no doubt that if the MGB GT V8 had used the higher rated V8 used in the Rover P5B/P6B like Ken Costello did it would have been a slightly better car.
Back in the day, I got my '62 Jetfire (turbo Olds 215") used with about 44K miles on it... I added a tach to it... I was a bit disappointed to see that it pumped up the lifters at only 4600 RPMs... fortunately at WOT the automatic trans shifted at a maximum of 4400 RPMs, before lifter pump up... the trans could be manually held to higher RPMs, but, obviously, there weren't many more RPMs left... I ordered adjustable rocker arms for it from the old J C Whitney, but as a busy poor college student, never got around to installing them... they were prolly a mistake, anyway... replacing stock light aluminum rocker arms with heavy cast iron ones with heavy steel adjuster bolts/nuts would have been a step backwards... later I heard simply shimming up the valve springs for more pressure was the better way to go towards 6,000 RPMs... as was inevitable, that trouble plagued design automatic tranny started giving trouble and we replaced it with a 3 speed manual and semi-centrifugal clutch... dump the clutch under 2500 RPMs and it slipped enough to allow the car to move away quickly... dump it above 2500 RPMs and the centrifugal forces caused it to grab enough to spin the tires...
Good point! I think they all suffer from it slightly just by design, however age, perished or aftermarket door seals and slightly out of line doors/windows all make it substantially more apparent at motorway speeds.
I too really like the original V8 wheels - however as i'm finding out, due to their construction getting them properly refurbished is now very difficult, hence why so many are swapped for different wheels. You can however buy uprated brand new 15 inch V8 wheels - at £2,600 a set, plus tyres and speedo calibration.
@@davidgerrard8661 Personally, I plan to keep mine as standard looking as possible, as it's a very low owner, genuine factory car that I currently use every day. I will likely foot the bill for proper refurbishment/ re-chroming of all 5 wheels or upgrade to the 15 inch V8 wheels in due course.
I've been to the MGCC annual visit to Alson Automotive for 10 years and more... every V8 B that's had a turn on the road has been way down on power, and easily beaten by the KSeries Midgets that often make 180 bhp and more...
They're all getting on a bit now, so perhaps that explains why they're down on power. Interestingly this one was dyno'd recently and made over 140 bhp - has never been rebuilt, but properly looked after with boxes of service history. Nevertheless, it's fairly common to 'pep' the Rover V8 up to over 200+ bhp and beyond (as per my Marcos). I'm not surprised a K-series engined Midget would develop more and be ultimately quicker and undeniably great fun - it's a much more modern engine in a smaller car after all. However, this morning I travelled 80 miles up the motorway in the V8 in comfort with a passenger, Labrador in the back and a boot full of shopping, so the overall package of the BGT V8 suits me perfectly.
@@fuelupclassic - Rear wheel or engine dyno? Of course the Buick 215 made 200 grossHP in stock form in 1963 cars... Olds version of Buick 215 had 215 HP... over 300 HP with exhaust restrictions fixed... ua-cam.com/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/v-deo.html
Very desirable! A 3.5 V8 weighing about the same as a 4-cylinder 1.8 - with that lovely V8 burble too. It’s good that the gearing has been altered - what revs does it do at 70mph?
I enjoyed it so much, that I ended up buying it and currently using it most days! Can't say i've noticed too much of a difference in terms of handling when compared with my 66 MGB GT. The V8 certainly does make it an overall very useable car in all types of driving.
Interesting! I believe both options may have been considered, with the V4 being the slightly more favoured option in the early days of development. Alas, neither were to be, but at least it made fitting a V8 possible without dramatic re-engineering. Thanks for watching. There's a little mention of the V4 here - www.mgownersclub.co.uk/mg-guides/mgb/mgb-gtv8
Actually, the Buick 215" V8 slipped right into my '75 MG Midget with no problems... and weighed less than the Spitfire 1500cc that came in it... Would have preferred the Oldsmobile 215, but the much wider valve cover placement of the Olds would have prevented access to spark plugs and exhaust bolts... I used the little BW T50 5 speed, 5th gear OD, gear box... Yes, with the top down, wind noise/buffeting above 25 MPH is kinda bad, as when stock new... considering adding a small 'venturi' as used on boats to direct the wind up above passengers...
Mine is 3.9 with edelbrock carb, mgrv8 headers and free exhaust, lightened flywheel, 123 ignition. Cosworth 5 speed t5 box. Wilwood brakes. Mgc axle. Hugely enjoyable and there are plenty with much more go than mine but considering the rather basic suspension I'm happy now really. Could use power steering hopefully next year
@@davidgerrard8661 Sounds marvellous. Before you go for power steering have a read about castor correction kits, I've fitted one and it has lightened the steering no end and the self centring that it had with the 70's tyres is restored.
The problem with the MGB was that it had a well designed body with obsolete running gear. Had it been designed with up to date gear from the outset it would have been a great car. It should have been fitted with the E Series engine from the Maxi rather than the ancient and inefficient B series. The fact that the Rover V8 could be fitted was not only the space available but the weight because it was comparable to the 4 banger. It was a shame that the Rover engine was fitted with SU carbs in totally the wrong orientation because had BL used the available and very well sorted Holley/Offenhauser combination it would have been ideal and more powerful. Also, as a design ploy to separate it from the basic MGB, BL could have fitted the MGC bonnet to add aggression as well as a statement that the V8 was a replacement for the C Engine with all the kudos that that conjured up. It would also have allowed the fitment of carbs/carb into the Vee of the engine, where they should have been. As usual, BL engineers and designers were both innovative and modern but the hierarchy were staid and unimaginative that ultimately killed the company.
BL could/ should have done lots of things, but alas it's all ancient history now and we are where we are. The MGB still remains one of the most successful and iconic British sports cars in history and the B series engine served it very well indeed. Perhaps the wonderful thing about them still being so plentiful and so well supported is that with the associated time, skills and money, it's perfectly possible to create an MGB to suit each owners' desires.
@@fuelupclassic The only thing worth having about the MGB is the body that even today is just right, everything else deserves change and often is changed, modified suspension and brakes, and the installation of a Zetec along with a Sierra 5 speed and multi link rear. Even back when the MGB came out the B Series was considered junk and vastly outdated, it was essentially a Marina with a sports body. When you consider what BL had in the stable at that time, E-Type, TR6 and formally the SP250, along with the Maxi producing the MGB was a retrograde step.
@@fuelupclassic I was commenting on the MGB's position during its production years, today there are two basic options, retain it as a historic car or modernise it because the design of the body could stand it. Its just a shame that BL didn't do that in the first place.
Unfortunately, MG never had the budget, plan or desire to re-work the 3.5 litre V8 to produce double the power of a standard MGB. It's the additional torque (rough double that of a B series) that makes all the difference when driving the V8 in my opinion, it may be double the capacity, but it's the big, lazy V8 nature that suits the car very well and even today it will still plod along rather nicely. It's up about 40% on power over a B-series with no noticeable weight difference, making it considerably much faster and more refined at motorway speeds, and because it never really works hard, more economical overall than my 1966 MGB GT. I bough this car after filming and cover around 60-70 miles a day in it and never feel it's underpowered, however it's a 50+ year old car, so I do have to accept its limitations. If you need more power, it's not particularly hard or expensive to reliably tune a Rover V8 to well over 200+ bhp and beyond, as many have done over the years.
I thought the gearbox was the same as the contemporary B 1800 ? The axle ratio was higher which dulled performance for relaxed cruising. (As in the C) The discs are slightly thicker, springs stiffer, Rover engine should have been 150+ bhp
The V8 uses a modified 4-synchro unit, that is virtually identical to those fitted in the B but with different ratios and bell housing of course. It's not a bad box by any means, but doesn't have the same satisfying feel as my early 3-synchro MGB GT or the MGC I covered many miles in. You can certainly feel the springs are stiffer but it remains comfortable. Regarding what power it should have developed - I believe Costello cars offered more power than the factory V8 cars, although it gets down the road pretty well in standard form and cruises along nicely, being a Rover v8 it can of course be 'pepped up' relatively easily if you really wanted to. Thanks for watching.
Great car but the stag was light years ahead with its engineering if only they could have used that engine they would never have been able to make enough of them ,
Indeed! I enjoyed the V8 so much, that I ended up buying it. I can't say the weight saving is particularly noticeable when compared to my 1966 MGB GT. However, it does feel considerably lighter on the front end (mainly, because it is) than the MGC GT I ran for a while.
Officially it's The act of loosely guestimating whether a goal is achievable, often without fully thinking through the ramifications of achieving said goal. Usually in my case it's justifying to myself that I definitely do need another car, when in reality I really don't! After doing a little 'man maths' of my own after this video, I bought the MGB GT V8 and now use it daily.
I have had one for 25 years. Now upgraded to a 3.9l high compression engine, with Mazda gearbox ( the original was not strong enough for the power ) and a Panhard rod on the rear axle to limit lateral movement, together with a stiffer anti-roll bar and slight negative camber, 1 degree. It will cruise at French motorway speeds completely unstressed. It was recorded at the Nurburgring at 143 MPH. Peak torque is at 95 MPH ! Two years ago it went to Switzerland, onto Vienna, the Stelvio Pass and Lake Como, from which I drove back in 12 hours. Last year Sardinia and Corsica. Great on long distance and fun in the twisty bits too ! Great video. If you buy one a little bit of sorting out, polly bush, new leaf springs and front coils, together with new dampers will transform them. A little negative camber makes them even sharper.
These are lovely little cars with a glorious V8 sound track.
Couldn't agree with you more. Thank you for watching.
A very good, unbiased , informative video!
Thank you for watching.
Yes: a pleasant chap.
A trip around Scotland when the weather gets a bit better sounds good Mat.
An excellent idea.
How about a trip to Scotland (Moray) to see another MGB V8 and compare. Maybe then do the North coast 500
@@johnboy200sx Fantastic idea!
@@fuelupclassic my dad has one that has been rested up for some time. Tahiti blue V8 with rubber bumpers
@@johnboy200sx Lovely! A rubber bumper V8 is a rare beast.
Back when this was new, this would have been viewed as having an absolutely massive engine.
Most people's family car was along the lines of an Austin 1100, Escort 1100/1300 or a 1600 Cortina.
Even the Austin 1800/2200 landcrab was viewed as a rather thirsty, big-engined car.
Love the MGB GT V8 - got to be peak MGB in anybody's book!
I think you may be right :)
Suffice to say, I would like to own one. Thanks for an enjoyable video 🙂.
Thanks for watching!
Fabulous,
Another enjoyable video, I'd love to do a resto mod BGT. I know you'd lose a lot of the character but swapping in modern brakes/suspension and perhaps Honda S2000 running gear would make a very fast and reliable weekend blaster. I'll go get my flameproof suit and await the responses!
Thank you for watching. Ohh yes, I like the idea of that! The great thing about an MGB is they are still plentiful and so well supported, so the sky is the limit in terms of modifications you can do.
How about a comparison test with this and mgc
Oh! I like your thinking - let me see what I can do.
The GT V8 is the car I’ve always wanted. What’s the mileage on your V8?. I will start looking to get one now….liked your review. Richard 👍🏻
I highly recommend one :)
I love the V8. Gorgeous car and very upgradable.
So true! I was impressed by it that I ended up buying the car.
Thank you for watching
@@fuelupclassic well done. How much was it?
I think you should do a track day test of one of the race prepared V8s from the MGBCV8 race series!
I like your thinking! I really enjoyed my time with the MGB GT V8 and ended up purchasing it. There's plans to slowly improve it over time but for now i'm using it everyday.
0 seconds ago
The MGB GT V8 is indeed a very powerful car in the day. A very sad story, in the 70's a friend of mine bought his wife one and it was a beast. Unfortunately she had a fatal rear end shunt with a HGV before they started to put the crash bars as standard on HGV trailers, it was terrible. Her car was wedged underneath the trailer. The accident was attributed to poor braking. I have always wanted a RV8.
Oh that is truly awful.
Let me do some digging and see if I can get an RV8 on the channel - it would round things off nicely and go well with some of the other MGs already featured. Thank you for watching.
Great video, I’m enjoying the MGB/C/V8 content. I hope the man maths comes up with the right numbers. I do agree the wind noise can get obtrusive, it’s the same in my BGT. I find rolling the Webasto back and opening the windows makes it more agreeable. Strangely I don’t remember it being an issue when the GT was my daily driver back in the early 90s. I would regularly cover quite big miles including motorway miles without problems, maybe we have just got used to the relative silence of modern cars so notice the noise more nowadays. I’m planning to experiment with some new door seals soon to see if that reduces the wind noise.
Yes, with the top down, wind noise/buffeting on my V8 '75 MG Midget above 25 MPH is kinda bad, as when stock new... cruising around town at 25 MPH with top down is very pleasant, though... considering adding a small 'venturi' as used on boats to direct the wind up above passengers... when younger we ignored all the buffeting, of course...
@@buzzwaldron6195 A V8 Midget !!! Wow that must be down right scary. I don't think I have ever seen a V8 shoe horned into a Midget must be pretty rapid.
@@martinhibbert1428 - Several videos of larger heavier engines into Midgets / Spitfires on UA-cam, but I wanted that lighter simpler V8... Instead of scary, I would say smoooooth compared to that horribly rough running 4... back in 1960's my daily driver was the stock turbocharged Olds 215 version of that Buick 215 in the Jetfire:
ua-cam.com/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/v-deo.html
Thank you for watching. I'd certainly be interested in hearing if new door seals help solve the problem.
Could you tell me which 'rubber bumper' year had the wider engine bay as standard please ? Thanks.
From memory, all engine bays of the rubber bumper cars are the same.
It's perfect without power steering and automatic transmission. I enjoyed the wonderful engine sound🙂Thank you🙏
Glad you enjoyed it and thank you for watching.
Was power steering an available option?
@@buzzwaldron6195Please check around 6 minutes and 17 seconds into this video.
@@buzzwaldron6195 No power steering option from factory, even the RV8 that came 20 years later, didn't get it. Although, there are several aftermarket options available
@@fuelupclassic - I'm in USA, so Brits got things we didn't... such as V8 MGB... or MGs and Triumphs after 1980... we only got TR8... never felt a need for power steering on my '75 MG Midget...
These MG wheels are my favourite ever wheels! They would look good on almost any make of car - but my a dream MG would be the MG MAGNETTE saloon, in a single colour (not 2 tone). The FARINA Magnette, that is!
Disagree about the need for it to look special. I love the understated looks and the discreet V8 badging is spot on in my opinion. Add to that those iconic wheels and you can tell at a glance what you're looking at.
It's a good looking car, for sure. I have to admit i've found myself admiring it from my office window most days.
I bought a new Damask Red MGB GT in June 1973 and took delivery on the first of August 1973 on the new M plate. Unfortunately within weeks the V8 was announced which I would have gone for. Nevertheless my 1800 did me well for two years until I bought a new Alfa Spider 2000.
Should have done that to start with 😊😊😊
It's a pity MG was stuck with the Range Rover tuned V8, as the Rover (P6B) V8 used by Ken Costello had 155bhp. Still I always lusted after one like many, but couldn't afford one, so ended up going down the 'cheaper' route. I bought a converted GT in 2006, once a 1973 B GT 4-cylinder in Mineral Blue. But what a car, completely stock from the outside down to the rostyles etc no V8 badges. It was a wolf in sheeps clothing. The conversion had been done by an ex (1970s) RAF Lightning jet pilot to an extremely high standard (he was a very talented engineer). He used the even better Rover V8 from an SD1 (better heads) and the LT77 5-speed gearbox. Riding on the original 4-cylinder ride height, it out performed the factory V8 in every way. I miss that car very much.
As to your point about the interior being little different in the factory V8 you drove, the speedo and rev counter are smaller diameter and wider apart (look at them in your red GT). This was due to the fitment of a collapsible steering column.
Oh that sounds like great fun and I bet it surprised a few people at the traffic lights! The beauty of the Rover V8 is that it can be tuned relatively easily to make impressive power.
Ahh yes! Now you mention it, I can see the slight difference with the dials compared to my BGT.
The Buick 215 made 200 grossHP in stock form in 1963 cars... Olds version of Buick 215 had 215 HP... over 300 HP with exhaust restrictions fixed... ua-cam.com/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/v-deo.html
Horse power ratings for the Buick/Rover V8 were quite different when tested by UK/Euro testers back in the day depending upon what rating was used.
The 1960 Buick Special was rated at 157 bhp (gross) at 4600rpm
Rover 3.5 L, 160 bhp (net) at 5200 rpm
Early Ranger Rover 3.5 L, 135 bhp (net) at 4750 rpm
Rover P6B 3500S 3.5 L, 152 bhp (DIN) at 5000 rpm. For the auto version of the P6B, 143 bhp (DIN) at 5000 rpm.
MGB GT V8 3.5 L, 137 bhp (DIN) at 5000 rpm
Early V8 Land Rover 3.5 L, detuned to 93 bhp (DIN) 3500 rpm
Rover Vitesse 3.5 L, 190 bhp (DIN) 5250 rpm
And not forgetting the Australian designed 4.4 L (taller block) 195 bhp (gross) at 4250 rpm
At the end of the day output figures did differ depending upon what period road tests you read and as said type of rating.
But there is no doubt that if the MGB GT V8 had used the higher rated V8 used in the Rover P5B/P6B like Ken Costello did it would have been a slightly better car.
Back in the day, I got my '62 Jetfire (turbo Olds 215") used with about 44K miles on it... I added a tach to it... I was a bit disappointed to see that it pumped up the lifters at only 4600 RPMs... fortunately at WOT the automatic trans shifted at a maximum of 4400 RPMs, before lifter pump up... the trans could be manually held to higher RPMs, but, obviously, there weren't many more RPMs left... I ordered adjustable rocker arms for it from the old J C Whitney, but as a busy poor college student, never got around to installing them... they were prolly a mistake, anyway... replacing stock light aluminum rocker arms with heavy cast iron ones with heavy steel adjuster bolts/nuts would have been a step backwards... later I heard simply shimming up the valve springs for more pressure was the better way to go towards 6,000 RPMs... as was inevitable, that trouble plagued design automatic tranny started giving trouble and we replaced it with a 3 speed manual and semi-centrifugal clutch... dump the clutch under 2500 RPMs and it slipped enough to allow the car to move away quickly... dump it above 2500 RPMs and the centrifugal forces caused it to grab enough to spin the tires...
Wow that sounded like fun!
Does anyone know what causes the wind noise and if there is anything that can be done about it
Good point! I think they all suffer from it slightly just by design, however age, perished or aftermarket door seals and slightly out of line doors/windows all make it substantially more apparent at motorway speeds.
Buy it! 😊
Frontline valance, c bonnet, Nicer wheels will give it a lift.
Mine is blaze and has Gunmetal minilite wheels, looks great
To David Gerrard
Nicer wheels? Did you say nicer? These are my all-time favourite wheels! I'm afraid uou're , therefore off my Christmas card list!
I too really like the original V8 wheels - however as i'm finding out, due to their construction getting them properly refurbished is now very difficult, hence why so many are swapped for different wheels. You can however buy uprated brand new 15 inch V8 wheels - at £2,600 a set, plus tyres and speedo calibration.
@@fuelupclassic exactly!
@@davidgerrard8661 Personally, I plan to keep mine as standard looking as possible, as it's a very low owner, genuine factory car that I currently use every day. I will likely foot the bill for proper refurbishment/ re-chroming of all 5 wheels or upgrade to the 15 inch V8 wheels in due course.
The give away inside is the 140 mph speedo and also the red chequered temp gauge
How about doing a Triumph Stag review?
coming soon :)
I've been to the MGCC annual visit to Alson Automotive for 10 years and more... every V8 B that's had a turn on the road has been way down on power, and easily beaten by the KSeries Midgets that often make 180 bhp and more...
They're all getting on a bit now, so perhaps that explains why they're down on power. Interestingly this one was dyno'd recently and made over 140 bhp - has never been rebuilt, but properly looked after with boxes of service history. Nevertheless, it's fairly common to 'pep' the Rover V8 up to over 200+ bhp and beyond (as per my Marcos).
I'm not surprised a K-series engined Midget would develop more and be ultimately quicker and undeniably great fun - it's a much more modern engine in a smaller car after all. However, this morning I travelled 80 miles up the motorway in the V8 in comfort with a passenger, Labrador in the back and a boot full of shopping, so the overall package of the BGT V8 suits me perfectly.
@@fuelupclassic - Rear wheel or engine dyno? Of course the Buick 215 made 200 grossHP in stock form in 1963 cars... Olds version of Buick 215 had 215 HP... over 300 HP with exhaust restrictions fixed... ua-cam.com/video/Jzw5W1rRMog/v-deo.html
It’s a peach - wish I had bought one instead of the two B’s I had in the 1980’s…
I enjoyed it so much, I ended up buying it! The V8 makes it a very useable and fun classic. Regrettably, i've hardly used my 1966 MGB GT since.
Very desirable!
A 3.5 V8 weighing about the same as a 4-cylinder 1.8 - with that lovely V8 burble too.
It’s good that the gearing has been altered - what revs does it do at 70mph?
The chrome bumper V8 had the rubber bumper ride height so don't handle as well as the 4 pot. Fabulous car though.
I enjoyed it so much, that I ended up buying it and currently using it most days! Can't say i've noticed too much of a difference in terms of handling when compared with my 66 MGB GT. The V8 certainly does make it an overall very useable car in all types of driving.
It was actually an alloy V6 the MGB was supposed to get, not a V4. A lovely car with the V8 though
Interesting! I believe both options may have been considered, with the V4 being the slightly more favoured option in the early days of development. Alas, neither were to be, but at least it made fitting a V8 possible without dramatic re-engineering. Thanks for watching.
There's a little mention of the V4 here - www.mgownersclub.co.uk/mg-guides/mgb/mgb-gtv8
Actually, the Buick 215" V8 slipped right into my '75 MG Midget with no problems... and weighed less than the Spitfire 1500cc that came in it... Would have preferred the Oldsmobile 215, but the much wider valve cover placement of the Olds would have prevented access to spark plugs and exhaust bolts... I used the little BW T50 5 speed, 5th gear OD, gear box...
Yes, with the top down, wind noise/buffeting above 25 MPH is kinda bad, as when stock new... considering adding a small 'venturi' as used on boats to direct the wind up above passengers...
Rather than a factory V8... give me a much more powerful V8 conversation ...
Definitely a good option for those wanting more power and not bothered about originality.
Mine is 3.9 with edelbrock carb, mgrv8 headers and free exhaust, lightened flywheel, 123 ignition. Cosworth 5 speed t5 box. Wilwood brakes. Mgc axle. Hugely enjoyable and there are plenty with much more go than mine but considering the rather basic suspension I'm happy now really. Could use power steering hopefully next year
@@davidgerrard8661 Sounds marvellous. Before you go for power steering have a read about castor correction kits, I've fitted one and it has lightened the steering no end and the self centring that it had with the 70's tyres is restored.
The problem with the MGB was that it had a well designed body with obsolete running gear. Had it been designed with up to date gear from the outset it would have been a great car. It should have been fitted with the E Series engine from the Maxi rather than the ancient and inefficient B series. The fact that the Rover V8 could be fitted was not only the space available but the weight because it was comparable to the 4 banger. It was a shame that the Rover engine was fitted with SU carbs in totally the wrong orientation because had BL used the available and very well sorted Holley/Offenhauser combination it would have been ideal and more powerful. Also, as a design ploy to separate it from the basic MGB, BL could have fitted the MGC bonnet to add aggression as well as a statement that the V8 was a replacement for the C Engine with all the kudos that that conjured up. It would also have allowed the fitment of carbs/carb into the Vee of the engine, where they should have been.
As usual, BL engineers and designers were both innovative and modern but the hierarchy were staid and unimaginative that ultimately killed the company.
BL could/ should have done lots of things, but alas it's all ancient history now and we are where we are. The MGB still remains one of the most successful and iconic British sports cars in history and the B series engine served it very well indeed. Perhaps the wonderful thing about them still being so plentiful and so well supported is that with the associated time, skills and money, it's perfectly possible to create an MGB to suit each owners' desires.
@@fuelupclassic The only thing worth having about the MGB is the body that even today is just right, everything else deserves change and often is changed, modified suspension and brakes, and the installation of a Zetec along with a Sierra 5 speed and multi link rear.
Even back when the MGB came out the B Series was considered junk and vastly outdated, it was essentially a Marina with a sports body. When you consider what BL had in the stable at that time, E-Type, TR6 and formally the SP250, along with the Maxi producing the MGB was a retrograde step.
@@clivewilliams3661 I'm still happy for now with my standard 1966 MGB GT, but perhaps one day I will 'upgrade' it with the things you mention.
@@fuelupclassic I was commenting on the MGB's position during its production years, today there are two basic options, retain it as a historic car or modernise it because the design of the body could stand it. Its just a shame that BL didn't do that in the first place.
That engine should have put out more power for its size. It’s twice the capacity of the 1800cc B series.
Unfortunately, MG never had the budget, plan or desire to re-work the 3.5 litre V8 to produce double the power of a standard MGB. It's the additional torque (rough double that of a B series) that makes all the difference when driving the V8 in my opinion, it may be double the capacity, but it's the big, lazy V8 nature that suits the car very well and even today it will still plod along rather nicely. It's up about 40% on power over a B-series with no noticeable weight difference, making it considerably much faster and more refined at motorway speeds, and because it never really works hard, more economical overall than my 1966 MGB GT.
I bough this car after filming and cover around 60-70 miles a day in it and never feel it's underpowered, however it's a 50+ year old car, so I do have to accept its limitations.
If you need more power, it's not particularly hard or expensive to reliably tune a Rover V8 to well over 200+ bhp and beyond, as many have done over the years.
Early Costello cars did have a bulge on the bonnet because he used the original Rover intake manifold…
I thought the gearbox was the same as the contemporary B 1800 ?
The axle ratio was higher which dulled performance for relaxed cruising.
(As in the C)
The discs are slightly thicker, springs stiffer,
Rover engine should have been 150+ bhp
The V8 uses a modified 4-synchro unit, that is virtually identical to those fitted in the B but with different ratios and bell housing of course. It's not a bad box by any means, but doesn't have the same satisfying feel as my early 3-synchro MGB GT or the MGC I covered many miles in. You can certainly feel the springs are stiffer but it remains comfortable.
Regarding what power it should have developed - I believe Costello cars offered more power than the factory V8 cars, although it gets down the road pretty well in standard form and cruises along nicely, being a Rover v8 it can of course be 'pepped up' relatively easily if you really wanted to. Thanks for watching.
140mph speedo?
Of course :)
The Elan sprint engine is half the size but just as powerful
Indeed it is! One to feature on the channel in the near future, I hope.
You're forgetting about the torque though.
Great car but the stag was light years ahead with its engineering if only they could have used that engine they would never have been able to make enough of them ,
There's a Stag lined up to feature on the channel soon, it's been years since i've driven one, so looking forward to revisiting.
Actually, the V-8 weighs about a hundred pound less then the 4 cylinder. Just saying.
Indeed! I enjoyed the V8 so much, that I ended up buying it. I can't say the weight saving is particularly noticeable when compared to my 1966 MGB GT. However, it does feel considerably lighter on the front end (mainly, because it is) than the MGC GT I ran for a while.
What is Man maths?
Officially it's The act of loosely guestimating whether a goal is achievable, often without fully thinking through the ramifications of achieving said goal.
Usually in my case it's justifying to myself that I definitely do need another car, when in reality I really don't!
After doing a little 'man maths' of my own after this video, I bought the MGB GT V8 and now use it daily.
@fuelupclassic good for you
@@alanbell6999 Thank you.
My 2023 mini countryman JCW won’t do 27mpg!
It's time you changed to a V8 ;)
Morris Oxford Coupe with a big engine. No thanks.
Mostly Rover 3.5L is a smoooooth long lasting engine...
wasn't that more of the case for the Farina Magnette?