A 500-horsepower electric two-seater with dramatic doors, usable luggage space and a claimed 0-62 mph time of 3.2 seconds sounds remarkably close to the affordable electric roadster enthusiasts have been waiting for. James makes that initial promise central to his assessment of the MG Cyberster GT, which is why his disappointment carries more weight than a review that simply objects to an electric sports car on principle. He likes the concept, has warmed to the exterior styling and repeatedly identifies qualities he genuinely wants to enjoy.
Those positives receive a fair amount of attention before the criticism takes over. The Cyberster attracts attention, its electrically operated roof is quick, the boot is large enough for a trip, and the 77 kWh battery has apparently returned roughly 250 miles of real-world range during his use. Home charging also fits conveniently into his routine, although the quoted 144 kW peak charging rate is described as less impressive than expected. The straight-line performance delivers exactly the sort of force its specifications promise once the appropriate driving mode is selected.
Much of the frustration instead comes from usability decisions that James demonstrates directly. The elaborate doors look spectacular but introduce awkward controls and concerns about obstacle detection, while the cabin surrounds the driver with four screens and frequently unintuitive interfaces. Climate functions are split between displays, commonly adjusted driver-assistance settings require repeated menu navigation, the steering wheel obscures portions of the displays, and the fog-light control prevents one screen from being completely switched off at night. His walkthrough is lengthy, but the physical demonstrations make these complaints considerably more persuasive than simply declaring the interior badly designed.
Ergonomics provide another substantial source of criticism. James cannot find a comfortable seating position, considers the steering-wheel shape unpleasant to hold and says the driver's mirror creates a significant obstruction from his eye line. He also feels positioned too high for a sports car. These observations are necessarily influenced by his own dimensions and preferences, so they cannot establish that every driver will encounter the same problems, but showing his seating position and control locations gives viewers useful context for judging them.
The road test delivers the harshest verdict. James describes a persistent low-speed jitter and says familiar imperfections feel exaggerated compared with other performance cars he has driven. More seriously, he reports that demanding public-road sections at legal speeds leave the chassis feeling unsettled, with bouncing and rear-suspension behavior that undermines his confidence. His same-day comparison with a modified NC-generation Mazda MX-5 helps establish the qualities he is looking for—interaction, composure and confidence—but it is still a subjective comparison between substantially different cars rather than instrumented chassis testing.
That distinction matters because the presentation occasionally pushes beyond its strongest evidence. Calling the Cyberster dangerous or saying it should not be sold in its current state is a much larger claim than saying its suspension feels poorly controlled on particular roads, and no objective handling measurements or independent testing are supplied to establish those broader conclusions. Even so, James is unusually specific about what he thinks needs fixing: the seats, steering wheel, suspension and screen-heavy interface. His willingness to praise the styling, practicality, acceleration, steering accuracy and basic electric-roadster concept keeps an extremely negative review from becoming indiscriminate criticism.
Pros
- Clearly explains why the two-seat electric-roadster concept is appealing before detailing where the execution disappoints.
- Hands-on demonstrations make the criticisms of the doors, screens, controls and driving position easy to understand.
- Gives meaningful credit to the Cyberster's styling, luggage capacity, roof operation, straight-line performance and usable real-world range.
- Familiar-road and MX-5 comparisons provide useful context for the host's complaints about ride and handling.
- Identifies specific changes that could address the problems rather than dismissing the entire concept of an electric sports car.
Cons
- Claims that the handling is dangerous and that the car should not be sold go beyond what the subjective road test alone can conclusively establish.
- Several ergonomic complaints depend heavily on the reviewer's seating position and personal preferences.
- The extended interior-interface criticism becomes repetitive after the main usability problems have already been demonstrated.
- Ride and handling conclusions would be stronger with instrumented evidence or additional comparative testing under controlled conditions.
A desirable electric-roadster concept makes the Cyberster's alleged shortcomings more interesting than a straightforward bad-car takedown, and the detailed demonstrations give most of the criticism a concrete foundation. The review is strongest when showing specific usability and ergonomic failures, while its most severe handling conclusions deserve more supporting evidence than the road test provides.
