• Hi Guest!
    If you appreciate British Car Forum and our 25 years of supporting British car enthusiasts with technical and anicdotal information, collected from our thousands of great members, please support us with a low-cost subscription. You can become a supporting member for less than the dues of most car clubs.
    There are some perks with a member upgrade!
    **Upgrade Now**
    (PS: Subscribers don't see this gawd-aweful banner
Tips
Tips

Some technical questions

Share this page

gsalt57tr3

gsalt57tr3

Jedi Warrior
Offline
I have some questions about the MGB.

What is the differential gear ratio?
How much torque does the engine generate?
 
The MGB dif has a 3.9:1 gear ratio - all years.
Depending on what years you are talking about it varied.
MkI 62-67: Torque 110lbs ft @ 3,000RPMs.
MkII 67-71: Torque 97lb ft @ 2,900RPMs.
MkIII (FED) 72-80: Torque 92lb ft @ 2,000RPMs.
 
Differential on all years of the MGB was 3.909:1
Torque varies by years.
1962-67 107 @ 3500
1968 110 @ 3000
1969-71 94 @ 3000
1976-80 varies between 72 to 94 @ 2500
 
I imagine the numbers can get kind of convoluted depending on what source you rely on or go to. For the record – I got my data from following two sources, that had the exact same numbers in both publications.

MGB and MGC by Jonathan Edwards.
And
The MGA, MGB and MGC by Graham Robson.

I suspect these are an average of those years of production as I suspect variances did occur from one model year to the next. Interestingly enough while the numbers matched more or less the model & MKs changed.

In the first book the MkII’s covers all MGBs made between 67-80 breaking it into two separate sections one for the chrome bumper years 67-74 and the other MkII section for the Black bumpers 75-80.

Whereas the second book calls the black bumpers a MkIII.

But I don't think that Jims numbers & mine are that far off from one another to worry about.
 
[ QUOTE ]
"How much torque does the engine generate? "

Enough. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Enough for a lawn mower maybe, but not nearly enough for a good, fun, car.
 
I dunno, I have a lot of fun in mine and I consider it a very good car! If I needed a classic with more torque I'd buy a TR6. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
"How much torque does the engine generate? "

Enough. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Enough for a lawn mower maybe, but not nearly enough for a good, fun, car.

[/ QUOTE ]

OUCH!!

Mickey
 
[ QUOTE ]
I dunno, I have a lot of fun in mine and I consider it a very good car! If I needed a classic with more torque I'd buy a TR6. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

[/ QUOTE ]

Agreed. Even with the low torque levels, an MGB is a fun car, as is the TR6 (which I also own), but both are a LOT more fun with more torque. If you think either is fun now, just wait until you drive one with a hot 302!
 
Nah, I don't drive these cars for raw power, I drive them for a true vintage sports motoring experience. If that means having less power than a modern car then so be it! Besides, I'd rather drive a slow car fast than a fast car slow. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

I can definately see the allure of a powerful modern engine instead of the old iron lump the cars came with, but that allure is less meaningful to me personally than the experience of piloting a vintage car through a set of twisties at full throttle.

But there is the allure of that darn Moss supercharger..... /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/devilgrin.gif
 
I'm with you Steve, i just love the feel and sound of the MG, If i wanted a performance car i'd buy one!
 
Back
Top