MG Midget

MG Midget: which version to buy

The MG Midget was sold as one generation (1964–1979), Roadster only, in four versions: 0.9 MT, 1.1 MT, 1.3 MT, and 1.5 MT. There is no second generation to compare, no restyle listed as a separate generation, and no measured 0–100, top speed, mpg, kerb weight, or tank size in this dataset.

The MG Midget was sold as one generation (1964–1979), Roadster only, in four versions: 0.9 MT, 1.1 MT, 1.3 MT, and 1.5 MT. There is no second generation to compare, no restyle listed as a separate generation, and no measured 0–100, top speed, mpg, kerb weight, or tank size in this dataset. The buying choice is therefore an engine-and-output choice on a shared chassis: same Manual 4-speed, same RWD, same 127 mm ground clearance, same Independent, spring front suspension, same Disc front / Drum rear brakes, Gasoline, Carburetor, No boost, 4 Inline cylinders. What changes is displacement and power — and those numbers do not climb in a straight line.

Specs that actually differ between versions

Valves per cylinder, compression, and bore × stroke are measured only on 0.9 MT: 2 valves per cylinder, compression 8.3, 62.9 x 76.2. On 1.1 MT, 1.3 MT, and 1.5 MT those fields are not measured.

Which generation changed what

There is 1 generation, 1964-01-01 to 1979-12-31, 4 modifications, body Roadster. No later generation raised power, added an automatic, switched drive, or changed clearance. If you are comparing “early vs late Midget” as if they were different cars in this catalogue, the data do not support that split: all four versions share the same start and stop dates. The spread is engine size, not a generation jump.

Power per litre: the extra cubic centimetres are not equal

Specific output (hp ÷ litres) is the cleanest way to see what the larger engines buy.

• 0.9 MT: 37 hp / 0.948 L = 39.0 hp/L
• 1.1 MT: 59 hp / 1.098 L = 53.7 hp/L
• 1.3 MT: 65 hp / 1.275 L = 51.0 hp/L
• 1.5 MT: 66 hp / 1.493 L = 44.2 hp/L

1.1 MT is the peak of this set: 14.7 hp/L above 0.9 MT and 9.5 hp/L above 1.5 MT. 1.5 MT is the largest engine and the second-weakest specific output. The last 218 cc (1493 − 1275) buy 1 hp (66 − 65) and 1 kW (49 − 48). That is 0.0046 hp per extra cc, versus 0.147 hp per extra cc from 0.9 MT to 1.1 MT ((59 − 37) / (1098 − 948) = 22 / 150).

Torque is measured on two versions only. 1.1 MT makes 88 Nm at 3500 rpm; 0.9 MT makes 68 Nm at 2500. That is +20 Nm (+29%) and the peak is 1000 rpm higher. 1.3 MT and 1.5 MT torque is not measured, so you cannot rank those two on pull — only on peak power and displacement.

Peak power rpm also climbs with the first three steps: 4750 (0.9 MT) → 5750 (1.1 MT, +1000) → 6000 (1.3 MT and 1.5 MT, +250 from 1.1 MT). The larger engines are specified as higher-revving peaks; whether they feel stronger at low rpm is not in the data because 1.3 MT and 1.5 MT have no Nm figure.

Weight per horsepower, mpg, 0–100: not measured

Kerb weight is not measured on any version, so kg/hp cannot be calculated. Gross weight, tank, wheels, 0–100, top speed, city / highway / combined consumption, and CO2 are not measured. Do not treat a larger engine as “heavier” or “thirstier” from this table — those quantities are simply not here. Ground clearance is 127 mm on all four, so ride height is not a differentiator.

0.9 MT — the small-engine case

0.9 MT is 37 hp / 27 kW from 948 cc. Versus 1.5 MT it has 29 hp less (66 − 37 = 44% of the 1.5’s power) and 545 cc less. Versus 1.1 MT it is 22 hp and 16 kW behind on 150 cc less. It is the only version with a full small-engine spec sheet: 2 valves per cylinder, compression 8.3, bore and stroke 62.9 x 76.2, 68 Nm at 2500. If the catalogue job is “document the engine,” this is the complete card. If the job is “most power on this chassis,” it is last.

Buy 0.9 MT only if you want the smallest displacement in the line and accept 39.0 hp/L. There is no economy number to offset the power gap.

1.1 MT — the version that buys the most power per litre

1.1 MT is 59 hp / 43 kW at 5750 from 1098 cc, 88 Nm at 3500. It is 22 hp (+59%) over 0.9 MT for 150 cc (+16% displacement). It is only 6 hp behind 1.3 MT and 7 hp behind 1.5 MT, while using 177 cc less than 1.3 MT and 395 cc less than 1.5 MT.

On this dataset, 1.1 MT is the rational default: best specific output (53.7 hp/L), the only larger-than-0.9 engine with a measured torque figure, and 89% of 1.5 MT power (59 / 66) from 74% of 1.5 MT displacement (1098 / 1493). Valves, compression, and bore × stroke are not measured on 1.1 MT.

1.3 MT versus 1.5 MT — almost the same peak, different size

1.3 MT: 65 hp / 48 kW @ 6000, 1275 cc. 1.5 MT: 66 hp / 49 kW @ 6000, 1493 cc.

The step from 1.1 MT to 1.3 MT is +6 hp (+10%) and +177 cc (+16%). Specific output falls from 53.7 to 51.0 hp/L. The step from 1.3 MT to 1.5 MT is +1 hp (+1.5%) and +218 cc (+17%). Specific output falls again to 44.2 hp/L. Peak rpm is the same (6000). Torque is not measured on either, so you cannot claim the 1.5 has more pull — only that it is 218 cc larger for 1 hp.

If the question is “which of the two big engines,” 1.3 MT is the one that still moves the power needle. 1.5 MT is the largest catalogue engine and the weakest argument on hp per litre. Neither has a measured 0–100 or mpg figure that would justify the extra displacement.

What “extra money” cannot be shown

This dataset has no prices. You cannot compute dollars per horsepower. What you can compute is horsepower per extra cubic centimetre, which is the closest proxy for “what the next version buys”:

• 0.9 MT → 1.1 MT: +22 hp / +150 cc = 0.147 hp/cc
• 1.1 MT → 1.3 MT: +6 hp / +177 cc = 0.034 hp/cc
• 1.3 MT → 1.5 MT: +1 hp / +218 cc = 0.0046 hp/cc

The first step is about 4.3× the hp/cc of the second, and about 32× the hp/cc of the third. Chassis, gearbox, drive, clearance, brakes, and fuel system do not change with that money-proxy: still Manual 4, RWD, 127 mm, Disc / Drum, Carburetor, No boost.

Reliability and problems

This source does not list failure rates, rust, or known faults. What is consistent — and therefore not a version-specific reliability claim — is the shared layout: Gasoline Carburetor, 4 Inline, No boost, Manual 4, RWD. Do not invent engine architecture beyond 4 Inline.

Dimensions and weight (same gap on every version)

Kerb weight: not measured. Gross weight: not measured. Tank: not measured. Wheel sizes: not measured. Ground clearance: 127 mm on 0.9 MT, 1.1 MT, 1.3 MT, and 1.5 MT. Front suspension: Independent, spring on all four; rear suspension: not measured. You cannot pick a “lighter” Midget from these cards.

Which version to choose

1. Default pick: 1.1 MT — 59 hp, 88 Nm, 1098 cc, 53.7 hp/L. Largest jump from the base engine; closest to the top power without the last two displacement steps. 2. If you want the most listed peak power: 1.5 MT — 66 hp / 49 kW. Know that 1.3 MT is 65 hp / 48 kW, so you are paying (in cc, not in a price we have) 218 cc for 1 hp. 3. If you want the last step that still adds real power: 1.3 MT — 65 hp from 1275 cc, 6 hp more than 1.1 MT, 1 hp less than 1.5 MT. 4. If you want the smallest engine and the only full compression / bore-stroke card: 0.9 MT — 37 hp, 948 cc, 68 Nm @ 2500, compression 8.3, 62.9 x 76.2. It is 22 hp behind 1.1 MT.

One generation, four names, one chassis. The numbers that move are 37 / 59 / 65 / 66 hp and 948 / 1098 / 1275 / 1493 cc. Everything else that buyers usually compare — mpg, 0–100, kerb weight, tank — is not measured.