The MGC was firmly based on the MGB, and was intended as a replacement for the Austin-Healey 3000, a car that by the time the MGC was announced in 1967, was at the end of its production life. The ‘C’ was powered by the in-line, 2912cc, six-cylinder, pushrod, OHV BMC ‘C’ Series engine, as fitted to the Austin 3-litre saloon and indeed the Austin-Healey 300 itself, was capable of developing 150bhp and slotted into a standard MGB body shell. The car was available in both roadster and coupe styles and should have been one of the best selling sports cars of its time, but it was not well received by the press, despite the fact that it had a top speed approaching 120mph. The complaint was that handling and acceleration were poor, and that it looked too much like the MGB, something that was seen as a handicap for some reason. When the first reports on the MGC appeared, MG engineers could not believe that the press had been driving the same car and were flabbergasted by their critical appraisal. An unworthy successor to the Austin-Healey, it was alleged, but the fact that it well out performed the standard MGB, that it was a very good touring car, and it could be purchased for a very similar price, didn’t seem to count for much.

By the time the MGC was introduced, Abingdon had lost control of engine design to other sectors of the vast British Leyland group, and the 3-litre in-line six-cylinder engine turned out to be around 25kg heavier than it should have been. Consequently the balance of what should have been a fine handling car was destroyed on account of it being very nose-heavy.

To accommodate the engine the changes that were made to the MGB body shell and mechanics were small. From the outside the most obvious changes were the bulge in the bonnet, essential to clear the top of the long tall engine and the larger radiator required to keep it cool. It also had 15-inch road wheels, these being larger than fitted to the MGB. So as to make way for the bottom of the engine, it was found necessary to remove the front cross member of the chassis, upon which the suspension and engine mounts were positioned in the MGB.. This meant completely revising the front suspension from the original coil spring set-up of the MGB to one that used torsion bars. These ran back longitudinally, to a mounting point below the floor, transferring the suspension stresses back to the centre of the now reinforced body shell. The rear suspension was essentially the same as the MGB, but with increased spring rates and a much stronger rear axle to accommodate the increase in power and weight. There was also a new and stronger, all synchromesh gearbox applied for the same reason, and as with the MGB, an option of automatic transmission.

MG did it's best with the weight balance problem, but were unable to place the engine as far back in the car to correct it. Options on engine positioning was hampered by the fact the car had to also accommodate the relatively bulky automatic transmission unit, mainly required for the American market. Hence, the engine had to sit well forward in the engine bay, which is why the car was so nose-heavy.

The poor reception the MGC received from the press undoubtedly shortened its production life. Its introduction coincided with the formation of the British Leyland group and it is thought that there was considerable bad feeling against anything emanating from the old BMC section of the corporation. It took only a month for the board to make the decision to drop the ‘C’ from the range in 1969 and to concentrate on the Triumph TR6 instead, as both cars were competing in the same market sector and were now made by the same company, so one of them had to go.

It appears that the MGC was doomed from the start and was only produced for two years, but in some ways it was reintroduced at a later date, this time with the Rover V8 alloy power unit, which was much lighter and suited the car far better in terms of the overall weight distribution within the car. However, this time the car was simply badged as an MGB V8, seemingly to avoid the type of poor publicity attracted by the MGC being presented as soemthing different to an MGB.