Home » Featured, Headline, Nanjing MG

What could have been – the MG SUV

4 September 2009 8 Comments

ssangyong-mg-1MG-Roewe’s parent company, SAIC, are very eager to build their own SUV based on Sssangyong IPR but a launch date of the Ssangyong-Roewe has never been announced despite it being spotted dozens of times out testing. It could be that the rights to Ssangyong IPR is in a murky place right now straight after Ssangyongs bankruptcy which saw them kick SAIC out of the boardroom and straight out of Ssangyong affairs, the Roewe SUV was expected to be launched in the first three months of 2009. The same could be said for the Roewe 95, it was largely understood that SAIC would have been excited to show off their luxury Roewe 95 limo model at the last Shanghai Auto Show, but as that is based off the Ssangyong Chairman it seems that that might have been temporarily delayed as well.

Before SAIC attempted to even retrofit a Ssangyong with Roewe badges, MG were readying their own MG version of the Rexton (see above left picture) It was set to be a model that would bring in much needed cash to a cash strapped company, a car they could just bring over and deliver straight into showrooms with a nice little profit on top. Sadly, MG-Rover died before the MG Rexton made it into production. SAIC seem eager to build their own version for the Roewe brand to cash in on the current compact SUV craze in China, but it is unclear if MG will get the sports SUV. SAIC is happy to keep Roewe as a ‘luxury’ marque, where as MG will deal with more sports models, basically keeping the the old MG-Rover spirit alive. It would be wise to remember that SAIC are planning to keep the Roewe brand for domestic sales, where as the MG brand will go global as one of the first major Chinese brands to drive into Europe and the USA, which could mean that an MG branded Rexton SUV is not that far from becoming a reality, should it first become a sellable Roewe.

Photo by Andrew Arnold and supplied the excellent Lord Sward.

1 Star - This article is pretty bad2 Stars - This article could be better3 Stars - pretty good article here4 Stars - I enjoyed this article!5 Stars - Wow! Great article guys! (1 votes, average: 5.00 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...

RSS feed

8 Comments »

Comment by Mike
2009-09-05 00:30:21

I thought that they would have learned from the old Rover days and the CITY ROVER disaster!
What’s the old saying about lipstick and pigs??

Comment by CCT
2009-09-05 12:49:50

Im not sure, with a little bit of cosmetic surgery it could have looked great.

 
Comment by Michael
2010-06-02 08:25:30

did you know this was originally planned for city rover http://www.aronline.co.uk/index.htm?matram72f.htm

 
 
Comment by Vie
2009-09-08 06:23:49

Cosmetic surgery on a Rexton might make it look ok, but it doesn’t fix the fundamentally poor quality of the rest of the vehicle.

Do as much cosmetic surgery on a pig as you like, its still a pig, and its now stuffed with silicone.

 
Comment by Michael Subscribed to comments via email
2010-02-12 20:39:01

MG Rover had a design that was far better for 4×4 which would have been branded as MG.

Comment by mark
2010-05-31 11:58:39

Do you have any more info or a link for this?

Comment by M0L0TOV
2010-06-01 05:13:00

Maybe he was referring to the MG Rover Tourer Concept. http://www.autointell.com/european_companies/rover-cars/MG-tourer/rover-tourer-02.htm

(Comments wont nest below this level)
Comment by Michael
2010-06-02 07:49:12

no i was talking about mg 4×4 concept. the design concepts are on http://www.mg-rover.org

They also had designs for a Rover 4×4 but could not go a head with due to how there licence to use the rover name from bmw. So that there was no confusion between rover and land rover.

 
 
 
 
Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Subscribe to comments via email
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)
You may use <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> in your comment.

Trackback responses to this post