Why????

[Dave]

When the BTCC were using MGZS's as race cars, why did they use a soloon, rather than a hatchback??

I would have thought the hatchback would have been more streamlined, than the saloon.

I'm no expert, but it just occured to me.

Cheers
Dave

[daytona365]

The Rover 400/45 therefore ZS saloon was a stiffer chassis, so much better to make into a BTCC car. Thats why Renault used the saloon 19 16v. Hatches have to have more "plumbing" to help stiffen the body.

Also all us saloon owners may not have had the knowledge our car was an BTCC car!!

[grimmy]

And the saloon is the best looking.

[daytona365]

Originally Posted by grimmy

And the saloon is the best looking.

[ZS]

Its because...

Saloon = MG
Hatch = Rover

Or at least thats my first impressions when I see the side profile of a 45/ZS.

[KevG]

Well the 400/45/ZS saloon was entirely a Rover design, nothing to do with Honda

[petet16]

Another suggestion was that it was for marketing purposes as it was felt that people associated the MG brand more with the saloon.

[Pinto]

Originally Posted by grimmy

And the saloon is the best looking.

[sheldore]

Had both and honestly prefer the hatch, looks more a sleeper.

In my opinion

mk1 Hatch looks the best
mk2 saloon well looks just awesome.

[mattie007]

Im sure I read that they tested both but the saloon offered better aerodynamics for racing. I believe they also tested the ZR before opting for the ZS.