Ok, yes... Please don't just come on here and say it's rubbish, that's the publics general opinion so I already know that.

What I'm after is comments as if it were being bought as new.. hands on experience of the handling etc etc..

It's a pipe dream... but something about it's rubbishness is making me want one, like above, more and more because.. if you take a step back, it's quite handsome really.

if you take a step back, it's quite handsome really.

Do you have real eyes ......or are they marbles.

Are there any of these left alive ??

I see a non MG one at the old fella across the road from me now then, it's on a reallly late plate like T plate which is odd.

My brother had one many moons ago and didn't reckon there was much wrong with it. Having had a brief drive myself I thought it ok too. Gusty engine, safe handling, quite spacious, comfy seats and an ok interior.

I seem to remember the magazines gave it a reasonable write up too.

Now that the eighties seem to be back in vogue, it's probably a good time for a Maestro comeback, so go for it

Do you have real eyes ......or are they marbles.

Are there any of these left alive ??

I see a non MG one at the old fella across the road from me now then, it's on a reallly late plate like T plate which is odd.

Yeah, they're real...

Yes, You can still find them if you look... but you do have to look quite hard.

T reg, that is late.... They actually kept making the Monteago until R plate... When BMW finally pulled the plug.

As for the Maestro.. The late registered ones aren't technically Austins, or Rovers.. They tried to sell the Maestro in India.. sent them over a knocked down kits but then it all went wrong and the kits got sent back and stored for a few years before being sold off to some lil auto firm on the coast who built them all up and registered them.. hence the late plate cars.

Edited 24 January, 201115 yr by Rob.

No worse than anything else at the time. Definitely prefer it to the Rover/Hondas that came after. If you're dreaming, why not dream about the Turbo, though???

My brother had one many moons ago and didn't reckon there was much wrong with it. Having had a brief drive myself I thought it ok too. Gusty engine, safe handling, quite spacious, comfy seats and an ok interior.

I seem to remember the magazines gave it a reasonable write up too.

Now that the eighties seem to be back in vogue, it's probably a good time for a Maestro comeback, so go for it

Thanks.. That's what I thought... I'd read on ARonline (yes, i'm a car geek) that the press had actually warmed to it around the time the big MG version arrived with the silly techno stuff removed.

The suspension from this car lives on (and still does, just not in the uk).. In the bubble Rover 200/25.. and now MG3SW (25 street wise for sale in china)

No worse than anything else at the time. Definitely prefer it to the Rover/Hondas that came after. If you're dreaming, why not dream about the Turbo, though???

Because the tick-ford body kit is the worse in world.. ever... It just isn't as smart as the pic in he OP.

ive heard there really qucik for a 2.0 turbo with only 150bhp 0-60 in 6.7 seconds and 131mph top speed in 1989. thats quick as some hot hatches today with the 0-60 time

The engine output, and weight are all quite good... but then, you'd expect it to be quite light, wouldn't ya.

MG Maestro EFi Tech Specs.

Edited 24 January, 201115 yr by Rob.

I've never driven an MG, but I've driven a 1.3 (which really was cr@p; slow, poor handling [worst understeer ever], Airfix snap-together facia, under damped...) and a Montego TDi which was better (enough power, better handling, better facia, better damping), but neither of them was a patch on my Citroen ZX or my Dad's BXs (so I'm comparing like with like on age).

Pic of the UGLY turbo for reference.

Edited 24 January, 201115 yr by Rob.

I've never driven an MG, but I've driven a 1.3 (which really was cr@p; slow, poor handling [worst understeer ever], Airfix snap-together facia, under damped...) and a Montego TDi which was better (enough power, better handling, better facia, better damping), but neither of them was a patch on my Citroen ZX or my Dad's BXs (so I'm comparing like with like on age).

How old was the 1.3 you drove as they revised them quite heavily as production went on (higher quality trim etc etc.. pretty sure the late Maestros got the Montegos Dash.)

Edited 24 January, 201115 yr by Rob.

Name That bumper!

This shouldn't work.... It just shouldn't.... but it DOES! lol...

I once had a turbo on loan from a car leasing company while mine was fixed.

It scared me deeply. The torque steer was a thing to behold. I tried giving it a real blast through the gears late one night when joining the A1. It took itself from the slip road to the outside lane while I held the steering dead straight!

Phil

I had a 2.0 Si Montego in the early 90's and really enjoyed it for what it was. My mate had a Maestro EFI and it was a reasonably quick car in its day

The engine is OK probably better than the carb fed Turbo.

That bumper is an early scoob one int it

That bumper is an early scoob one int it

ding ding ding ding ding ding... 10 points!

I had a 2.0 Si Montego in the early 90's and really enjoyed it for what it was. My mate had a Maestro EFI and it was a reasonably quick car in its day

The engine is OK probably better than the carb fed Turbo.

Yeah, Carbs are nice... but EFi is better!

engines were quite good, but apparently they had small brakes, easy to get them to fade.....

I don't know about he MG versions, but I seem to remember the normal versions didn't have much (if any) anti-roll bar up front and so allowed for a lot of roll.

My dad says his Montego was the best car he has ever owned until it was written off my a stupid minicab driver with no insurance or licence that done a runner at the scene. At the time the copper said if my dad was in a ford he would have probably been killed.

Maestro's are kinda cool in the retro 80's bad car way. I kinda like it, bit of an ugly duck but you want to look after it. "M" unit in the turbo was a fairly robust engine

I owned a 1.6 back in the day and it saved my life apparently. I was t-boned by a Mk2 Fiesta at a roundabout and it took the impact very well. The insurance assessor couldn't believe I walked away without a scratch. They said the same to me that if it had been a Ford, I wouldn't have survived. I loved that car and have fond memories of it.

Because the tick-ford body kit is the worse in world.. ever... It just isn't as smart as the pic in he OP.

Wrong :no:

This is the worst bodykit ever

Yeah, Carbs are nice... but EFi is better!

SU turbo was in the Montego, however IIRC the Maestro Turbo was still EFi

Wrong :no:

This is the worst bodykit ever

think they need lessons on modifying