RE: The Red Octagon Returns, Along With The 'K-Series
Discussion
mackie1 said:
Yup, much like VAG doing 122bhp and 180bhp versions of the 1.4 TSI.
Yep, except a TSI will spank the MG6 on fuel economy, smaller engine but more power.It's a clever bit of engineering - supercharger and turbocharger in series. The MG6 has not moved the game on since 2005 or whenever the Rover 75 1.8T was launched.
BILL PAYER said:
I cant see this venture ending well Rover/MG never had a good reputation for reliability or build quality in the past and now the chineze are involved i dont see things getting any better.
My brother in law worked on the production line at Rover in Longbridge. Forgot to put a screw in, doesn't matter, forgot to put a bolt in doesn't matter, anything they forgot or didn't do they didn't care as they all said they'll fix it later when the customer brings it back.The scary thing was, sometines they couldn't be bothered to finish a job on the assembly. I didn't shed any tears for him when he was made redundant, and the only funny thing was when he brought a Rover on company employee discount was he had to return it to be fixed (and waited it ages for it) as the glovebox didn't shut. What goes around........
Harji said:
My brother in law worked on the production line at Rover in Longbridge. Forgot to put a screw in, doesn't matter, forgot to put a bolt in doesn't matter, anything they forgot or didn't do they didn't care as they all said they'll fix it later when the customer brings it back.
The scary thing was, sometines they couldn't be bothered to finish a job on the assembly. I didn't shed any tears for him when he was made redundant, and the only funny thing was when he brought a Rover on company employee discount was he had to return it to be fixed (and waited it ages for it) as the glovebox didn't shut. What goes around........
Happens quite allot in the car industry, my mums boyfriend worked on the Escort production line at Halewood and they were just do the same as you described then or have a tea break lol. My teacher at college was an engineer at Rover and he used to travel round the country investigating warranty claims and he went to a Liverpool dealer and all they did is watch porn, drink tea and tell jokes, us Brits are a lazy lot pmsl.The scary thing was, sometines they couldn't be bothered to finish a job on the assembly. I didn't shed any tears for him when he was made redundant, and the only funny thing was when he brought a Rover on company employee discount was he had to return it to be fixed (and waited it ages for it) as the glovebox didn't shut. What goes around........
BILL PAYER said:
I cant see this venture ending well Rover/MG never had a good reputation for reliability or build quality in the past and now the chineze are involved i dont see things getting any better.
SAIC make VW and GM cars so they can build reliable cars. The TF has not had nay problems since they started making the cars again so that is proving to be a reliable car and it is better built then the Rover MG TF, also the MG6 electrics come from the UK so that is a plus, they would of ironed out any faults by now as the Roewe 550 has been out since 2008 and is proving to be reliable over there.andymadmak said:
will261058 said:
MDT said:
HellDiver said:
with an engine that should have been put to rest 15 years ago?
why should it have been out of production 15 years back? They have some know faults, which according to the report say have been resolved. There are lots of engines which have been in production and in use for many decades with small amendments and add-on’s. The Jag XK lump was in production and use for 42 year. And from memory the Rover V8 will not have been much less? Bizarre, I wonder how I managed hundreds of thousands of miles in K series engined cars.... Wish I could say the same of the Audi and BMW products I have had the missfortune to own (from new) Coil packs failures, Vanos failures, cracked cylinder heads, noisy diff, more electrical failures than I care to remember, PAS pumps that self destruct.... all in German cars, sometimes leaving me stranded. (Never been left stranded in any MG, Rover, TVR or Jag I have owned)
I suspect you're one of those much fabled internet know-alls. And for that read "know nothings". Witness your pathetic response to the MG6 chassis design.
One thing that does amuse me about people like you is just how inconsistent you are. I bet you're one of those people who, if offered a Rover 100, would turn it down cos of the Euro NCAP 1 star result it got in 1995. I dare you to check out the 1994/1995 Euro NCAP test result for the 3 series BMW. (I see you are a BMW fanboi).......................
Well for your information mate I am not a know it all, but I do know engines. How dare you make presumptions about me when you dont know me. I have worked on all kinds of aircraft engines from Rolls Royce Merlins and Griffons to the latest gas turbines. I do drive BMWs and have done for over 20 years and have never broken down or had any failures apart from a dash cluster that started playing up in an E34. Are you trying to tell me that the k series is not known for head gasket failure even though it is well documented? The cooling system on the K series is marginal when it is working at its best. Take the Freelander with the 1.8 for example if you look at the classifieds, one of the selling points a lot of vendors mention is the fact that the CHG has been replaced and most go around the 50-55K mark. I spoke to a LR dealer I know who told me that the last model was only available in its last years as an oil burner because of the reliability probs with the K series head gaskets. So tell me again that the engine is reliable! Oh and while you are at it you might just want to be a bit more specific with your rant about German build quality and all the many failures you say you have had. A lot of friends of mine drive German cars and I dont see them getting stranded too often which I would have expected if the cars were as bad as you say they are. Most have had much the same experience as I have. I know all the usual failures with BMWs as I keep up with them but they are by far the minority and you would need to be unlucky and indeed the unluckiest person in the world to experience all of them. Noisy diffs and coil pack failures are not things that leave you needing a new engine either. Vanos problems are well known and they make a noise but actual failure is rare. They also happen to be a Rolls Royce component, and in most cases the fix is actually rather simple and cheap, as long as you have the expertise and dont go to BMW.
If you are seriously trying to tell me that TVR, MG/Rover are all more reliable than BMW and AUDI then you need to wake up and smell the coffee while having a look at the bigger picture and perhaps realising that the facts say otherwise.
What do you mean by "people like you". I wouldnt touch a Rover 100 because they were not my sort of car then and def not now. I actually pay scant regard to Euro Ncap. I buy a car because I like it not because it has been engineered to pass specific tests. I believe in passive safety too, ie how a car handles, brakes etc as I think avoiding an accident is better than having one.
So why dont you get your socks and sandals on and go annoy somebody else. How do you like presumptions being made?
Hint for those who can't be bothered... It achieved a half a star higher rating, despite being a substantially larger vehicle.... German engineering at its best though eh?
BMW f
ked up the K-series anyway, at first they used a wet liner, but when BMW bought Rover group they would not invest in developing a bigger engine, so Rover engineers had to change to a damp liner which is where all the problems started, early K-series were very reliable engines, shame BMW ruined it. I was told this by my teacher who was an engineer at Rover, and allot of other people have said this as well. My dads old 214SLI wedge did 220,000 miles and never had HGF, very reliable car. HGF is easy to fix anyway, just fit a MLS gasket on it, simples.
ked up the K-series anyway, at first they used a wet liner, but when BMW bought Rover group they would not invest in developing a bigger engine, so Rover engineers had to change to a damp liner which is where all the problems started, early K-series were very reliable engines, shame BMW ruined it. I was told this by my teacher who was an engineer at Rover, and allot of other people have said this as well. My dads old 214SLI wedge did 220,000 miles and never had HGF, very reliable car. HGF is easy to fix anyway, just fit a MLS gasket on it, simples.Edited by steven211 on Saturday 19th February 02:17
andymadmak said:
will261058 said:
king arthur said:
HellDiver said:
Isn't the MG6 just a tarted up 45, which is a facelifted 400, which is a tarted up old Honda? I'm pretty sure it is.
Nope, it's nothing of the sort. New car from the ground up, apart from a few 75 bits.
will261058 said:
Is this what you are calling "my pathetic response"?You are even more stupid than I thought! This was not a comment on the MG6 chassis design. I was laughing at the fact that he called it "New car from the ground up" then added "apart from a few 75 bits".
It is an all new platform anyway, only bit that comes from the 75 is the sub frame, that is all.Harji said:
When you actually can compose a comprehensive statement , I might be able to make sense of it, until then stop getting your three year old to type out your favourite BBC link , and stand up and compose someting yourself. Don't get personal, go with your bedfellow and relax.
If it takes you 7 hours to come up with a response, and that's it. I'd say it's because your point really didn't stand up to any scrutiny.steven211 said:
SAIC make VW and GM cars so they can build reliable cars. The TF has not had nay problems since they started making the cars again so that is proving to be a reliable car and it is better built then the Rover MG TF, also the MG6 electrics come from the UK so that is a plus, they would of ironed out any faults by now as the Roewe 550 has been out since 2008 and is proving to be reliable over there.
I must admit that i did always like the look of the TF and the ZT and if they can build them to be reliable it will be a nice carsteven211 said:
BMW fked up the K-series anyway, at first they used a wet liner, but when BMW bought Rover group they would not invest in developing a bigger engine, so Rover engineers had to change to a damp liner which is where all the problems started, early K-series were very reliable engines, shame BMW ruined it. I was told this by my teacher who was an engineer at Rover, and allot of other people have said this as well. My dads old 214SLI wedge did 220,000 miles and never had HGF, very reliable car. HGF is easy to fix anyway, just fit a MLS gasket on it, simples.
Shuuush Steven. Some of us did not need to be told by our teachers, we saw the evidence with our own eyes. ked up the K-series anyway, at first they used a wet liner, but when BMW bought Rover group they would not invest in developing a bigger engine, so Rover engineers had to change to a damp liner which is where all the problems started, early K-series were very reliable engines, shame BMW ruined it. I was told this by my teacher who was an engineer at Rover, and allot of other people have said this as well. My dads old 214SLI wedge did 220,000 miles and never had HGF, very reliable car. HGF is easy to fix anyway, just fit a MLS gasket on it, simples.PH : Shirley a nest bed of the most anti-Rover and MG non-enthusists in the known universe. ..
Like Cpl. Jones said about the Jairmans, PHers dont like it up 'em Cap'n...
BMW can do no wrong. Rover Group was in safe Bavarian hands obviously as soon as they took over the company all those years ago.......
.More seriously, earlier K-Series blocks were the stronger closed deck type.
The Bavarians invested close to zilch when stretching and stretching the little 1.1 K ever upwards towards 1.8 Litres. Had they simply invested in scaling up the original design that surely would prvide a better scenario. They did not do that.
Earlier Closed Deck K-Series.
Later Stretched to 1.8 K-Series ~ spot the differences.
The closed deck option was discontinued in the interests of commonality economies across the range of engines from 1.1 to 1.8. To the experienced eye, those differences are huge !
.
Finally, even on K-Series, cylinder head gaskets rarely ever 'fail' on any car. They are invariably firts damaged by some other agency, usually overheating following coolant los .. ON ANY CAR.
Some of the UBER rated Gerry Built product are prone to such so called 'failures' ... and far worse.
.
will261058 said:
Is this what you are calling "my pathetic response"?You are even more stupid than I thought! This was not a comment on the MG6 chassis design. I was laughing at the fact that he called it "New car from the ground up" then added "apart from a few 75 bits".
Don't get why that's funny? Pretty much all new cars carry over some parts from previous ones. I'd be intrigued to learn of any that don't if you know of them.Mr2Mike said:
fido said:
Yep, except a TSI will spank the MG6 on fuel economy, smaller engine but more power.
I didn't realise there had been any long term tests of the MG6 yet?Plus, disproportionate power extracted from smaller engines is stressful for both the engine's longer term welfare, and much more importantly, the driver and car occupants .... Fine for a quick blast but...
As they say Oooop Norf, and this applies equally to all seven corners of the known Universe :~
Yee gets owt for nowt. Owt costs.
SIZE MATTERS ...
.
J4CKO said:
Jag-D said:
Looks like a bd love child of an Alfa Romeo 156 and a Toyota Avensis..
K series engine? So their entire strategy is to make more money on HG repairs than car sales?
Read the thread, they have adressed that, perhaps give it a chance to proove that its been sorted rather than assuming is hasnt ?d love child of an Alfa Romeo 156 and a Toyota Avensis..K series engine? So their entire strategy is to make more money on HG repairs than car sales?
Funny how nobody remembers the Headgsaket issues with BMW sixes back around the same time as the K was still new, or Nikasil issues, Vanos problems, Audi Gearboxes, new Mini engine failures etc
The fact remains: Head gasket issue sorted or not, it's still butt ugly
And yeah I remember the oil starvation problems, the head cracking, the Nikasil and vanos problems AND I also remember a major recall due to collapsing rear suspension mountings not to mention new mini problems
It's not just merely slating Rover...
There,I think that about covers it
fido said:
Yep, except a TSI will spank the MG6 on fuel economy, smaller engine but more power.
It's a clever bit of engineering - supercharger and turbocharger in series. The MG6 has not moved the game on since 2005 or whenever the Rover 75 1.8T was launched.
I wasn't attempting to compare the two just illustrating that the same basic engine can be configured in different ways. Without direct injection it probably won't be able to compete with the VAG offerings. Then again the 1.4 TSI doesn't seem to be as good on fuel as it should be.It's a clever bit of engineering - supercharger and turbocharger in series. The MG6 has not moved the game on since 2005 or whenever the Rover 75 1.8T was launched.
king arthur said:
will261058 said:
Is this what you are calling "my pathetic response"?You are even more stupid than I thought! This was not a comment on the MG6 chassis design. I was laughing at the fact that he called it "New car from the ground up" then added "apart from a few 75 bits".
Don't get why that's funny? Pretty much all new cars carry over some parts from previous ones. I'd be intrigued to learn of any that don't if you know of them.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff