RE: SOTW: Rover 420 GSi Turbo
Discussion
confused_buyer said:
MGJohn said:
British ? .... Indigenous? ... When it suits, they'll be gone.
Spot the difference. Several of those non-indigenous Manufacturers have threatened to upsticks in the past and ... what of the future IF, it no longer suits them to remain? Except to vend their stuff here invariably with larger margins than elsewhere.
Many UK owned manufacturers have also said the same things over the decades and more car factories have been closed by UK managers and companies in the last 50 years than any foreign ones.Spot the difference. Several of those non-indigenous Manufacturers have threatened to upsticks in the past and ... what of the future IF, it no longer suits them to remain? Except to vend their stuff here invariably with larger margins than elsewhere.
No large international will remain anywhere if it does not suit them, regardless of who owns them.
.
Quite but, if only it was that simple. So take it to the extreme and they all decide to do that for the benefit of...
We must be doing it right. Not France, Germany, Japan and all the others still with healthy indigenous Industries.
Mark my words, Germany and all the others with their huge trade surpluses will be sorry that they did not go the way of the UK.
MGJohn said:
Not just in a straight line, with decent tyres it makes all the difference. Not just back in the day either, even by many of today's 'superior' car standards. Maybe I was lucky and had the only good example .. 
The biggest improvement for reducing torque steer is to fit the uprated 'Anti Torque Steer' bushes. This makes a massive improvement and costs very little.The Rover T series engine is rock solid, I have had no trouble with mine in 7 years of ownership. Same goes for the gearbox, as another informed PHer said, switch to the Type B diff and one should have no troubles.
I can't remember the exact OE tyre size, I believe it is 185/195. Fitting some good quality tyres (as MGjohn said) with a bit of extra width also makes a big improvement.
Just remember a lot of modern cars come with bigger and better rubber.
Maybe Rover should have done some simple improvements - it would have quelled some of the critics of these cars.
Those with perhaps less (poor) pre-conceived stereotypes would take a punt on these Rover Turbo's make a few choice modifications and have a pretty decent motor for a little outlay.
MGJohn said:
If only it was that simple.
I think there are very few people who wouldn't say it would be a lot better if the UK car industry was UK owned.However, we lost most of that in the 70's (when the big decline was) and it isn't coming back. That isn't a reason not to be pleased that what we do have, albeit not ultimately UK owned, is doing rather well at the moment in a world recession.
On that subject, let's not be too down on Rover figures. In 1994, when this 420 was made, Rover Group made 476000 cars. In 2011 the now split parts which made up Rover Group made 429,000 (238k Land Rover, 191k Mini) - with 2012 being the first full Evoque production year it is quite likely that what is left of Rover will be back making as many cars as it did in 1994, and a lot more than the 390k they made in the last combined Rover Group year of 1999.
Dr Imran T said:
MGJohn said:
Not just in a straight line, with decent tyres it makes all the difference. Not just back in the day either, even by many of today's 'superior' car standards. Maybe I was lucky and had the only good example ..
The biggest improvement for reducing torque steer is to fit the uprated 'Anti Torque Steer' bushes. This makes a massive improvement and costs very little.The Rover T series engine is rock solid, I have had no trouble with mine in 7 years of ownership. Same goes for the gearbox, as another informed PHer said, switch to the Type B diff and one should have no troubles.
I can't remember the exact OE tyre size, I believe it is 185/195. Fitting some good quality tyres (as MGjohn said) with a bit of extra width also makes a big improvement.
Just remember a lot of modern cars come with bigger and better rubber.
Maybe Rover should have done some simple improvements - it would have quelled some of the critics of these cars.
Those with perhaps less (poor) pre-conceived stereotypes would take a punt on these Rover Turbo's make a few choice modifications and have a pretty decent motor for a little outlay.
Dr Imran T said:
.
The biggest improvement for reducing torque steer is to fit the uprated 'Anti Torque Steer' bushes. This makes a massive improvement and costs very little.
.
.
Funny you mention that, the previous owner of my car had fitted or had fitted replacement bushes on the car ~ nice Purple Ones. A professional man who paid good money for someone to rebuild his gearbox with the Type A Torsen differential. Trouble is, they forgot to put the required 2.2 litres of MTF 94 gearbox lubricant in it. So soon into my ownership, whilst on a long journey at "speed", the gearbox lost both 4th and 5th gear sets which became toothless. I drove home all the way in 3rd. Fortunately I had a spare MG Montego Turbo Gearbox and transferred the TorSen to that. The ratios and final drive are the same on both the MG and Rover PG1 gearboxes which was a stroke of luck. Later working on that damaged gearbox I learned much in so doing. I'm not professional spannerman merely an experienced amateur and have since rebuilt several similar gearboxes successfully as a result of my 'unfortunate' learning experience with that first one. I published my experiences with and illustrated thread. One or two folks having seen that asked me to fix their gearboxes .. The biggest improvement for reducing torque steer is to fit the uprated 'Anti Torque Steer' bushes. This makes a massive improvement and costs very little.
.
.
... as they had both had poor experiences with professionals.These gearboxes have a reputation for being weak. Not so with those in my continuous ownership. Any gearbox without lubricant will be weakened. For those that are interested in these things, here's the toothless 4th and 5th gear set pairings. Warning! Not pretty sight for those with even a sliver of mechanical sympathy.
MGJohn said:
Funny you mention that, the previous owner of my car had fitted or had fitted replacement bushes on the car ~ nice Purple Ones. A professional man who paid good money for someone to rebuild his gearbox with the Type A Torsen differential. Trouble is, they forgot to put the required 2.2 litres of MTF 94 gearbox lubricant in it. So soon into my ownership, whilst on a long journey at "speed", the gearbox lost both 4th and 5th gear sets which became toothless. I drove home all the way in 3rd. Fortunately I had a spare MG Montego Turbo Gearbox and transferred the TorSen to that. The ratios and final drive are the same on both the MG and Rover PG1 gearboxes which was a stroke of luck. Later working on that damaged gearbox I learned much in so doing. I'm not professional spannerman merely an experienced amateur and have since rebuilt several similar gearboxes successfully as a result of my 'unfortunate' learning experience with that first one. I published my experiences with and illustrated thread. One or two folks having seen that asked me to fix their gearboxes .. ... as they had both had poor experiences with professionals.
These gearboxes have a reputation for being weak. Not so with those in my continuous ownership. Any gearbox without lubricant will be weakened. For those that are interested in these things, here's the toothless 4th and 5th gear set pairings. Warning! Not pretty sight for those with even a sliver of mechanical sympathy.
In my experience in the past, if you wanted a weak gearbox you looked no further than FIAT. I've never known anything like it, any I'd ever had I'm sure were made from chocolate ... as they had both had poor experiences with professionals.These gearboxes have a reputation for being weak. Not so with those in my continuous ownership. Any gearbox without lubricant will be weakened. For those that are interested in these things, here's the toothless 4th and 5th gear set pairings. Warning! Not pretty sight for those with even a sliver of mechanical sympathy.
carinaman said:
I never had any issues with the g/box in my Uno Turbo despite the abuse, but then again they had the same box as the Strada/Ritmo 105TC. I've had 2 Fiats and never heard of their gearboxes being particularly problematic.
My Uno Turbo diff fell to pieces and smashed a hole in the side if the gearbox leaving me with just third gear one day! My Uno 55s required a new gearbox when one of the bearings collapsed, my Strada 70s synchro was shot I could go on and on. When replacing the gearbox for my turbo the car had to be off road for 9 months because there was hardly any in the country such was the demand, and that was from FIAT UK. Edited by Rammy76 on Monday 9th July 16:49
How the car was cared for/abused in previous ownership plays a part here with car reliability. Some folks are very 'unlucky' with their cars despite FSH and regular servicing etc... Yeah ... right. Entrusting the care of your car to professionals is NO guarantee of a job well done or, done at all. That has been my experience on much more than one occasion. One of the reasons I decided many moons ago to learn how to look after my cars myself. It has really paid off in so many ways.
The many cars during fifty years of Motoring I've bought new have all been 100% reliable. My experience with my first MG, an MGB back in the 1960s taught me that the finest repair shops are not a guarantee of a job well done. That's called experience.
Over those years, I've bought the occasional used car which the previous owners have spent a fair bit on and despite "professional" expertise and sometimes much expense, still have an unreliable car so decide to get shot.
Bought several like this and guess what, a quick wipe over with an oily rag and hey presto, a reliable car! It's rarely rocket science and I have not bought a loser yet ... always a first time though.
Again experience has convinced me there are more unreliable pro-repair outfits and car users than there are genuinely unreliable cars.
.
The many cars during fifty years of Motoring I've bought new have all been 100% reliable. My experience with my first MG, an MGB back in the 1960s taught me that the finest repair shops are not a guarantee of a job well done. That's called experience.
Over those years, I've bought the occasional used car which the previous owners have spent a fair bit on and despite "professional" expertise and sometimes much expense, still have an unreliable car so decide to get shot.
Bought several like this and guess what, a quick wipe over with an oily rag and hey presto, a reliable car! It's rarely rocket science and I have not bought a loser yet ... always a first time though.
Again experience has convinced me there are more unreliable pro-repair outfits and car users than there are genuinely unreliable cars.
.
Rammy76 said:
carinaman said:
I never had any issues with the g/box in my Uno Turbo despite the abuse, but then again they had the same box as the Strada/Ritmo 105TC. I've had 2 Fiats and never heard of their gearboxes being particularly problematic.
My Uno Turbo diff fell to pieces and smashed a hole in the side if the gearbox leaving me with just third gear one day! My Uno 55s required a new gearbox when one of the bearings collapsed, my Strada 70s synchro was shot I could go on and on. When replacing the gearbox for my turbo the car had to be off road for 9 months because there was hardly any in the country such was the demand, and that was from FIAT UK. Edited by Rammy76 on Monday 9th July 16:49
carinaman said:
I never had any issues with the g/box in my 127 1300GT either. I've gone through clutches, but never gearboxes.
I always treated my cars quite sympathetically, and certainly not had any trouble with any other makes but I suppose I could've been unlucky?Don't get me wrong, I loved my Uno Turbo and apart from the gearbox and regularly snapping clutch cables it was a great little car with performance that was much higher than any 1301cc had any right to! I think that was maybe part of the problem, the engines were so good and easily tuneable that I think the gearboxes were a bit overwhelmed. Happy memories :-)
Rammy76 said:
300bhp/ton said:
Isn't the PG1 a Honda gearbox? And the earlier Meastro's used VW gearboxes.
That's what I thought, with the VW gearbox being the inferior one..
Lifting the bonnet of my MG ZS and looking closely at various items reveals how many components were outsourced and not manufactured in house.
MGJohn said:
Rammy76 said:
300bhp/ton said:
Isn't the PG1 a Honda gearbox? And the earlier Meastro's used VW gearboxes.
That's what I thought, with the VW gearbox being the inferior one..
Lifting the bonnet of my MG ZS and looking closely at various items reveals how many components were outsourced and not manufactured in house.
dapearson said:
Ha haaaa!!
My 2nd car, which replaced an 850cc Mini, was a Rover 214si. Black with beige interior and wood inlay. I narrowed it down to that, or an Escort Eclipse 1.3i. The Rover won because of its great K-Series engine. Revvy and powerful. Just a shame it was attached to a truly awful chassis.
My mates has 1.0 litre metros, novas, etc. I had 50% more power than them. THAT was all that mattered.
Which series of 214 was it - MK2 'wedge shape' or MK3 'bubble shape'? Either way, if you think that it was an awful chassis, then all I can say is you should have tried the Escort, and you would have seen how much better the Rover's was! - weather it was a MK 2 or 3. My 2nd car, which replaced an 850cc Mini, was a Rover 214si. Black with beige interior and wood inlay. I narrowed it down to that, or an Escort Eclipse 1.3i. The Rover won because of its great K-Series engine. Revvy and powerful. Just a shame it was attached to a truly awful chassis.
My mates has 1.0 litre metros, novas, etc. I had 50% more power than them. THAT was all that mattered.
Back in the day in the 1990's, my mum had an L reg (wedge shape) Rover 214, and my dad had an L reg Escort 1.6. Being as honest as possible as much as I loved the OLD Fords, the Rover 214 was leaps and bounds better than the Escort, it really was. Seriously, in pretty much every way - comfort, style, refinement, power, equipment, class, handling, build quality, paint quality/rust protection. The Escort could not even be compared to be honest - the Rover really was in a differant class. My parents have said on a couple of occasions, that out of all the cars they have ever owned (a lot over the years - Various Triumphs, Austins, Fords, a couple of Vauxhall's, BMW's, and Citroen's) that that old 214 was probably the best car they have ever owned.
I learnt to drive in that old L reg 214, before sadly crashing it and then drove the Escort until I purchased my own car - a 1996 MK3 bubble shape...Rover 214. It was a good car, not quite as good as the old L reg MK2 in some ways, but nicer in others, and very VERY fun. Sadly last year a 90 year old women crashed in to the back of it :-(. But yes, no way could an old Escort be compared.
Edited by ashy19 on Wednesday 15th August 13:36
Edited by ashy19 on Wednesday 15th August 13:37
Edited by ashy19 on Wednesday 15th August 13:38
the_hood said:
In the early 90's I used to driove my dad's Rover 216 GSi. This had the Honda engine. It was nippy and well equipped. The fake wood didn't bother me back then as I thought it looked upmarket and Rover hatchbacks weren't very common where I lived.
As to these to sheds, no thanks. If i really wanted a Rover now there's a huge choice so why settle for a damaged one or one that's been attacked with an orange spray can.
What fake wood? Believe it or not, these cars actually had REAL wood - unlike Ford, Vauxhall, BMW's fake wood at the time.As to these to sheds, no thanks. If i really wanted a Rover now there's a huge choice so why settle for a damaged one or one that's been attacked with an orange spray can.
The BRM has not been attacked with an orange spray can - the orange grill was standard.
BeirutTaxi said:
On the contrary John, nearly all of the decent PH'ers have a dislike not for brands but instead for crappy cars.
Well, that may sometimes be the case - but what is a 'crappy car' to someone, is a good car to another person. Define 'crappy'? A Ferarri is crappy in terms of practicality, cost, economy - a Ford Fiesta would be MUCH BETTER in that respect. Of course a Ferarria is a fast super car, while a Ford Fiesta is not. There is no single definition of 'good' or 'crap' when talking about something like a vehicle.Also, in my mind a lot of people (not all) will run down and slag off a particular model of car, or indeed a whole RANGE of models, or even a whole brand (a lot of PH users included) when they, in actual fact, have no real world experience of that/those particular products.
By the way, my girlfriend has just sold her Peugeot 206 and purchased a Rover 25 1.4. I have to say she does prefer it so far, and it feels a more substantial car.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff