MG Motor UK IM5 review

That’s the wrong question. What you should be asking first is ‘Is it comfortable?’ Because it isn’t, and it dominates your entire experience of the car.

The MG IM5 runs double wishbone suspension up front and a multi-link setup at the rear. Tuned well, this ought to be capable of a supple ride, even if it does have to fight with all 2.3 tonnes of the Performance version tested here.

The reality is… very different. From crawling through town to wafting down A roads and cruising along the motorway, there’s a constant shimmy and shake; sometimes at the back, sometimes at the rear, mostly both. The front and rear often feel like they’re doing different things, and there’s no dialling it out with the driving modes because none of them alter the suspension in any way. When you hit a rut or pothole it thunks loudly, and in corners you can feel it scrabbling against Newton’s third law.

Don’t get us wrong, the IM5 doesn’t wallow or pitch very much at all, and although the ride’s rather firm that’s not really the problem: it just comes across as unsophisticated and under-developed. However much testing it went through in China, MG had too big a rescue job on its hands to make it UK ready.

There’s no sugar-coating it: it’s extremely poor. The IM5 is easily MG’s worst ambassador now – and weirdly, the more ungainly IM6 SUV rides slightly better. Even in its most basic form without air suspension. Which the IM5 doesn’t get at all. Don’t be surprised if MG U-turns on that decision ASAP.

Get it all out of your system. What else do I need to know?

The dynamics are insipid. You get no feedback from the tyres and no information at all through the steering wheel – we’re keen to know if the rear-wheel drive versions feel pointier and more, well, alive.

You can sling the IM5 about a bit on a fast road and it does at least feel balanced (the majority of the torque tends to go to the back, going by the digi-readout), but it doesn’t take much for understeer to kick in and you’ll frequently lose your way because of the synthetic steering. So eventually you’ll just not bother.

The throttle and brake pedals are noticeably elastic, but that’s fine for a car like this. Modulation from both is nice and relaxed, so making progress in town is just as easy as it is on the motorway.

All of that means you’ve little trust in the ungodly acceleration. Plant the accelerator and an initial surge pins you back in your seat before a tidal wave of torque – 592lb ft in the Performance – really hits home. It’s like Oleksandr Usyk has been personally invited to give your belly his best shot. Brace! Brace!

There’s rear-wheel steering, and you’ll be very thankful for it in tight turns. You get three levels of regen – adjustable via the screen only – and the strongest one is still very light, so no one-pedalling. Driving modes include Super Eco, Eco, Comfort, and Sport, plus a Custom setting so you can fine-tune the steering effort and pedal response.

The range looks impressive on paper. Is it?

This dual-motored, all-wheel drive Performance promises 357 miles of range, and on a rainy July day on a mix of roads we coaxed a solid 3.0 mi/kWh from it – aka, about 290 miles from its 100kWh battery (96.5kWh usable). With a drag coefficient of 0.226 we were expecting better.

The middle-order Long Range has the same battery and with one less motor is rated for 441 miles – we suspect that will be the big seller, and rightly so. Even if it does make do with… 402bhp and 0-62mph in 4.9 seconds. Yeah, you’ll cope.

The Standard Range gets a 75kWh (73.5kWh usable) battery, with less sophisticated LFP chemistry (the others get NCM cells that allow for 396kW charging) that peaks at a mere 153kW. That one’s still capable of 304 miles, and with 291bhp acceleration is far more sensible.