Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

The 1968–69 MG MGC had size 3000 shoes to fill

Set your clock back to 1967 for a moment. Back when MG sports cars still roamed the earth. It was before the dark days of British Leyland, but MG was still part of the British Motor Corporation (BMC), which also owned Austin, Morris, and others. Thanks to corporate cost-cutting and U.S. safety regulations that year, MG found itself with the unenviable task of building a replacement for the revered Austin-Healey 3000. Remember, the Healey was a quintessential classic English roadster—a car almost impossible to dislike. It was a tough act to follow, and MG didn’t have a lot of resources at its disposal. Imagine showing up to an open mic night and realizing you’re up after Dave Chapelle.


MG’s answer was essentially a softer six-cylinder version of the MGB, called the MGC.


Read the full article on

Replies (6)

Replies (6)

History has blighted the C but many C's have had the minor mods to make this car far more engaging than the B. 

Lighten the FW to 9kg and the engine will be more willing than the B , correct dizzy good dampers with correct oil in rears and a 7/8th anti roll bar the car will handle way past most drivers ability.

The engine has been developed to past 300hp and 240-260 with good torque is there. A modestly modified engine will produce 175hp . Far more interest in the C nowadays and the Racing C is world wide . Alloy heads being produced to gain performance and a 20kg weight reduction at the front along with alloy backplate and hubs all reduce the modest front end bias. Check out the Facebook page "MGC register" EFI fully developed race engineEFI fully developed race engineEType tyres fill archEType tyres fill arch95542085_10157204557025754_1795263279954657280_n.jpg0_0_0_0_250_141_csupload_70980348_large.jpg 

New Driver

The MGC had two strikes against it from the start. An under-specifies front sway bar made for pretty mushy handling (a 7/8" bar transforms that) and the awful intake manifold and exhaust crippled the engine output.  I made a triple SU manifold for mine and with stock compression a very mild cam and some headwork and got 170 bhp  and was dead even with a V12 XKE coupe on top end (130 mph - OK, it was an automatic Jag, but.....)

The factory mismanaged this one - it could have been a decent car.


I bought a ‘67 MGBGT Special in ‘69 and became familiar and on a first name basis with a mechanic at the local MG dealership.  They had several MGC’s in with overheating and engine failure problems and the mechanic said in tearing the engines down they found sand from casting in the water jackets.  Once that was cleaned out the overheating problems went away.  Has anyone else heard of on experienced this?

New Driver

The English Pinto

Pit Crew

I owned a BRG convertible back in the day, and it was a perfectly good (albeit nose heavy) top down cruiser.  The real problem was maintenance (surprise!).  There are some unique rubber parts/fittings that deteriorate and break.  You guessed it: there are no replacements available.  It eats exhaust systems too.  Very inconvenient.  These days, this car belongs in a museum -- not used as a regular driver.

Pit Crew

As much as I admired MGB's, I thought the "C" was a dud from the get-go.


And I think you meant "understeer" in your third from last paragraph, and not "oversteer". These things didn't have enough power or torque to drive with the throttle!


- Jim

Intermediate Driver