Rovers - were they really that bad?
Discussion
jamieduff1981 said:
Most people who talk about cars, including a fair share of PHers wouldn't know a Piston from a pinion gear and simply aren't the sort of characters to actually bother to look in to, well, any subject really and form their own views. You can tell people who do actually know anything because their opinions aren't so 1-sided. The rest merely parrot what they've heard someone else say like puppets.
Pretty sad really. I can't imagine how vacuous life must be if you just go around repeating what other people make you think all the time.
.
Sad indeed like your views about Skoda !Pretty sad really. I can't imagine how vacuous life must be if you just go around repeating what other people make you think all the time.
.
They say that the best looking Thai women, aren't .
Same kind of follows for Rovers, all the best ones , weren't
My dad ran various rovers for over 20 years. Montego 1.3, Montego 1.6L, rover 216gti, rover 220 coupe and finally a late model rover 25. none gave any trouble and none had hgf
He went and bought his first brand new car ever last year - a Seat Ibiza 1.4 to a. Engine rattles at just 3000 miles diagnosed as pistonslap. New engine fitted. That engine leaked water so after another 1000 miles of trying to get it to stop leaking, Seat fitted another brand new engine. So that's three engines it's had in 4000 miles and was off the road for two months.
But hey VAG cars are uber reliable and rivers were scrap eh?
He went and bought his first brand new car ever last year - a Seat Ibiza 1.4 to a. Engine rattles at just 3000 miles diagnosed as pistonslap. New engine fitted. That engine leaked water so after another 1000 miles of trying to get it to stop leaking, Seat fitted another brand new engine. So that's three engines it's had in 4000 miles and was off the road for two months.
But hey VAG cars are uber reliable and rivers were scrap eh?
jamieduff1981 said:
Not so much forgotten but never known.
Most people who talk about cars, including a fair share of PHers wouldn't know a Piston from a pinion gear and simply aren't the sort of characters to actually bother to look in to, well, any subject really and form their own views. You can tell people who do actually know anything because their opinions aren't so 1-sided. The rest merely parrot what they've heard someone else say like puppets.
Pretty sad really. I can't imagine how vacuous life must be if you just go around repeating what other people make you think all the time.
We had 3 600s and a ZT in the family, and my best friend had a ZR. The 600s were good cars. The first, an L series diesel, was a very good car, the second was nice but a bit let down by a reliable but otherwise lacklustre and thirsty Honda engine and the last was a T-series petrol turbo. The whole car had suffered a lot of neglect, was acquired for £150 as a non-runner (broken CV joint which in turn wiped the crankshaft position sensor off) and needed a bit of work to get back to being a good car which offered good performance and vastly better fuel consumption than the Honda engined one. The ZT was a good car (great to drive) and the ZR had an extremely hard life from when it left the forecourt - but took its punishment remarkably well.
The 600s (and Accord) seemed better able to resist rust than comtemporary BMWs and certainly Mercedes, the only weakpoints being at the front and rear of the back wheel arches. BMWs rusted there too, but also the sills and front wheel arches and Mercedes of the era were just water soluable and made MX-5s look well rust-proofed.
So to answer the thread title question - No, Rovers REALLY were not THAT bad. It's just the usual British self-loathing at work in the vast majority of these cases.
I find it amazing how Skoda - who made truely terrible cars until well after the British brands all sorted themselves out - can get away with reinventing themselves yet Rover and Jaguar can't.
Make the classic 1980s joke about why Skodas have rear window heaters now and someone will definately tell you that you're out of date and that Skodas are now built using Volkswagen technology. Ok fine.
Jaguar was bought by Ford who taught them quality control and then by Tata who funded them and told them to get on with it but you can't mention Jaguar now without someone saying some ancestor had an XJ6 which leaked a bit, or indeed that it must therefore be a rebadged Mondeo.
Rover teamed up with Honda and did exactly what Skoda do. Actually that's not true. Skoda takes already incredibly bland and forgettable cars from Volkswagen and removes all the character and return to the market with something that makes a Toyota Auris look like the driving enthusiast's choice - and all is well. Rover took well engineered but a bit Japanese-styled Hondas and made them quite handsome. Then then developed the 75/ZT with BMW's backing. But it was still a Rover and therefore inherently crap in the eyes of the British because hte ex-next-door neighbour's great grandpa had one before the war and it needed new points and smoked a bit before the car was melted down to make a Cromwell tank.
Is it not also rather one sided to suggest Rovers are better than BM and Merc because they didn't rust as much.Most people who talk about cars, including a fair share of PHers wouldn't know a Piston from a pinion gear and simply aren't the sort of characters to actually bother to look in to, well, any subject really and form their own views. You can tell people who do actually know anything because their opinions aren't so 1-sided. The rest merely parrot what they've heard someone else say like puppets.
Pretty sad really. I can't imagine how vacuous life must be if you just go around repeating what other people make you think all the time.
We had 3 600s and a ZT in the family, and my best friend had a ZR. The 600s were good cars. The first, an L series diesel, was a very good car, the second was nice but a bit let down by a reliable but otherwise lacklustre and thirsty Honda engine and the last was a T-series petrol turbo. The whole car had suffered a lot of neglect, was acquired for £150 as a non-runner (broken CV joint which in turn wiped the crankshaft position sensor off) and needed a bit of work to get back to being a good car which offered good performance and vastly better fuel consumption than the Honda engined one. The ZT was a good car (great to drive) and the ZR had an extremely hard life from when it left the forecourt - but took its punishment remarkably well.
The 600s (and Accord) seemed better able to resist rust than comtemporary BMWs and certainly Mercedes, the only weakpoints being at the front and rear of the back wheel arches. BMWs rusted there too, but also the sills and front wheel arches and Mercedes of the era were just water soluable and made MX-5s look well rust-proofed.
So to answer the thread title question - No, Rovers REALLY were not THAT bad. It's just the usual British self-loathing at work in the vast majority of these cases.
I find it amazing how Skoda - who made truely terrible cars until well after the British brands all sorted themselves out - can get away with reinventing themselves yet Rover and Jaguar can't.
Make the classic 1980s joke about why Skodas have rear window heaters now and someone will definately tell you that you're out of date and that Skodas are now built using Volkswagen technology. Ok fine.
Jaguar was bought by Ford who taught them quality control and then by Tata who funded them and told them to get on with it but you can't mention Jaguar now without someone saying some ancestor had an XJ6 which leaked a bit, or indeed that it must therefore be a rebadged Mondeo.
Rover teamed up with Honda and did exactly what Skoda do. Actually that's not true. Skoda takes already incredibly bland and forgettable cars from Volkswagen and removes all the character and return to the market with something that makes a Toyota Auris look like the driving enthusiast's choice - and all is well. Rover took well engineered but a bit Japanese-styled Hondas and made them quite handsome. Then then developed the 75/ZT with BMW's backing. But it was still a Rover and therefore inherently crap in the eyes of the British because hte ex-next-door neighbour's great grandpa had one before the war and it needed new points and smoked a bit before the car was melted down to make a Cromwell tank.
Not sure why the role eyes turned up at the top, it wasn't intentional
Edited by MarshPhantom on Saturday 28th March 10:35
MarshPhantom said:
Is it not also rather one sided to suggest Rovers are better than BM and Merc because they didn't rust as much.
You've said that, not the original poster. However it's a pretty important aspect of build quality, partly because it can be one of the most expensive to fix.You can look back at the thread and see numerous variations on "Rovers are s
t, they all rust". Yet look at numerous 10+ year old examples still on the road to see that simply wasn't true of later models. Weirdly there are manufacturers, Ford spring to mind, whose products do rust and yet for some reason don't have that reputation.Chris1255 said:
MarshPhantom said:
Is it not also rather one sided to suggest Rovers are better than BM and Merc because they didn't rust as much.
You've said that, not the original poster. However it's a pretty important aspect of build quality, partly because it can be one of the most expensive to fix.You can look back at the thread and see numerous variations on "Rovers are s
t, they all rust". Yet look at numerous 10+ year old examples still on the road to see that simply wasn't true of later models. Weirdly there are manufacturers, Ford spring to mind, whose products do rust and yet for some reason don't have that reputation.Yet their reputation seems unaffected. Strange really but it is a fact. My own experiences with Rovers over 40+ years was that some of the best designs in the world were ruined by shoddy workmanship and the complete failure to address fundamental problems in the products. Classic case being the A series engine which leaked oil like a sieve to the point where the underside of umpteen Mins I had was better protected underneath by oil washing about than they were by the wholly inadequate indeed non existent rustproofing.
5,500,000 engines later the A series was still leaking oil in all directions after 50 years of production. Nissan bought the design and sorted all the inherent weaknesses out. The small Nissan engines have the A series strengths, which were considerable, but none of the weaknesses because Nssan have actually ensured that eradication of those faults is effective.
That is where Rover in its many forms failed. Brilliant desigs let down by incompetent engineering and no real interest in putting any faults right in production. Rover were doomed because model after model (Marina, Ambassador, Princess, Allegro, etc etc) were simply dreadful. And continued to be dreadful throughout production. No company can survive in modern manufacturing with such a stupid approach. Hence the collapse.
Tooled around in an 03 plate 25 1.4 (100hp) for a while and I was pleasantly surprised by it. Peppy little engine that loved to rev, the ride quality was very good and it felt light and nimble through the corners. I didn't care about the badge or their troubled history, they are the basics most car enthusiasts look for. Shame the build quality wasn't there, but you can't have everything!
Steffan said:
5,500,000 engines later the A series was still leaking oil in all directions after 50 years of production. Nissan bought the design and sorted all the inherent weaknesses out. The small Nissan engines have the A series strengths, which were considerable, but none of the weaknesses because Nssan have actually ensured that eradication of those faults is effective.
This is an interesting story I've not heard before - is there any place online I can read about this bit of history?St John Smythe said:
RoverP6B said:
The 75 owed very little to BMW. The rear axle was basically that of the E34 5-series minus the diff. Electrics, switchgear, platform and petrol engines were all Rover's.
Factory Sat Nav in my old ZT was straight out of a BMW. Brakes were the same as a 330ci.Correct. A lot of wiring and electrics IS BMW - RoverP6B is way off the mark here. The Sat Nav and TV ICE are all pure BMW E46 and can be upgraded "plug and play" with later BMW units.
The diagnostic mode in the instrument pack is identical to the E46, as is the temp guage functionality that reads dead centre between about 75c and 115c.
Headlight washer pump and windscreen washer pump from BMW 5 Series E39 are straight swap.
Actuator-secondary throttle traction control - BMW series 5 E39 2,8l.
Lock actuators are BMW era Mini.
Plenty of BMW content in the 75/ZT.
ETA and brakes, as mentioned above.
I must admit I quite liked the Rover's I had experience of, first was my bro in law getting a black 220GTi which was IMO one of the best looking hot hatches of the ere and every bit as quick and fun to drive as others such as Astra GSi and Escort RS2000; he then changed to a 620Ti which didn't handle well and looked dull as dishwasher but went like stink in a straight line, could keep with Impreza turbos and Sapphi Cosworths until you saw a corner. My second car was a 25 1.6 which was a good looking car and nippy too for the insurance group, my mate got the 1.4 bubble shape 200 after I took him out in the 25 and for a 1.4 to have over 100bhp in its day was well impressive. Never experienced any major reliability issues with any of them really.
Is the R75 glovebox handle the same as a Mini?
Since my last post I sold the ZT and replaced it with a gorgeous rust free 14 year old MGF.
It's been standing outside all winter and when I dropped the new battery in it fired after a single turn of The starter, got up to temp and carried on as if six minths laid up never happened. Even the brakes were fine after a coupe of dabs.
Build quality isn't up to much, but that may be down to me removing bits of the interior
Since my last post I sold the ZT and replaced it with a gorgeous rust free 14 year old MGF.
It's been standing outside all winter and when I dropped the new battery in it fired after a single turn of The starter, got up to temp and carried on as if six minths laid up never happened. Even the brakes were fine after a coupe of dabs.
Build quality isn't up to much, but that may be down to me removing bits of the interior
I'm currently shedding around in a 75. 2.0 V6, auto, Club trim (with CD changer taking up the entire bloody glovebox).
It's a lovely, comfy old thing to waft up and down the dual carriageway in every day. It obviously has an image which tends toward the 'old man' but for me that's all part of the charm. Mine was owned by an old fella before me and I recently found an old National Trust guidebook hidden in the rear armrest cubby!
For under a grand, if you just want to waft about you really can't go wrong.
It's a lovely, comfy old thing to waft up and down the dual carriageway in every day. It obviously has an image which tends toward the 'old man' but for me that's all part of the charm. Mine was owned by an old fella before me and I recently found an old National Trust guidebook hidden in the rear armrest cubby!
For under a grand, if you just want to waft about you really can't go wrong.
liner33 said:
Same kind of follows for Rovers, all the best ones , weren't
Au contraire. The rebadge jobs were the worst. The native real-Rover Rovers were the best (P5, P6, SD1, 75).V8forweekends said:
St John Smythe said:
RoverP6B said:
The 75 owed very little to BMW. The rear axle was basically that of the E34 5-series minus the diff. Electrics, switchgear, platform and petrol engines were all Rover's.
Factory Sat Nav in my old ZT was straight out of a BMW. Brakes were the same as a 330ci.Correct. A lot of wiring and electrics IS BMW - RoverP6B is way off the mark here. The Sat Nav and TV ICE are all pure BMW E46 and can be upgraded "plug and play" with later BMW units.
The diagnostic mode in the instrument pack is identical to the E46, as is the temp guage functionality that reads dead centre between about 75c and 115c.
Headlight washer pump and windscreen washer pump from BMW 5 Series E39 are straight swap.
Actuator-secondary throttle traction control - BMW series 5 E39 2,8l.
Lock actuators are BMW era Mini.
Plenty of BMW content in the 75/ZT.
ETA and brakes, as mentioned above.
As regards 75s as cheap smoker barges - what are V8s fetching?
V8forweekends said:
Steffan said:
5,500,000 engines later the A series was still leaking oil in all directions after 50 years of production. Nissan bought the design and sorted all the inherent weaknesses out. The small Nissan engines have the A series strengths, which were considerable, but none of the weaknesses because Nssan have actually ensured that eradication of those faults is effective.
This is an interesting story I've not heard before - is there any place online I can read about this bit of history?The A series remains my persoinal favourite because I raced Mini's using that engine and I never, ever, had an on track failure in all the years I drove them. Not one. Head gaskets were absolutely unbreakable in normal use and even with 11:1 compression on the S engines 1340cc perfectly possible.
Pre detonation could be a problem but following the Weslake heads as amended by Clive Trickey, David Vizard and others that could be managed. I even ran 12:1 on occasion?
Too small for me nowadays. I do find V8's just unbeatable especially in lightweight specials the roar and V8 warble, and constant thrust is just wonderful.
Usually Rover(Buick as you will know) overbored to 5 litres. Supercharging could be fun but I find anything over 250 bhp in lightweight cars of, say, under 1400 lbs, quite enough of a handful for me!
Being very old and in my 70th year, I do like to drive cars that are reasonably civilized nowadays, so some soundproofing etc OTR is beneficial but does add weight. Hardtop is essential too! Must have good ICE too. Back problems also require sensible springing and a reasonable ride and the best possible seats,in which case I can and still do happily trundle about all over Europe which is a darned good game IMO!
I had a Rover 620 diesel.
Yes, it was *that* bad. Worst wood-style plastic I've seen, gear stick would clash to centre console on engaging 4th gear, heater needed a kick to start spinning, and the clutch arm broke on my drive which was gearbox out job to replace, at which point I scrapped it. It was relatively comfy though.
Great design feature that you had to disassemble the front hubs to replace the brake discs...
Not experienced other Rover's personally, but the 800-series are decent, and the older stuff is quite attractive - would love a P6 or P5b!
Yes, it was *that* bad. Worst wood-style plastic I've seen, gear stick would clash to centre console on engaging 4th gear, heater needed a kick to start spinning, and the clutch arm broke on my drive which was gearbox out job to replace, at which point I scrapped it. It was relatively comfy though.
Great design feature that you had to disassemble the front hubs to replace the brake discs...
Not experienced other Rover's personally, but the 800-series are decent, and the older stuff is quite attractive - would love a P6 or P5b!
SuperPav said:
I had a Rover 620 diesel.
Yes, it was *that* bad. Worst wood-style plastic I've seen, gear stick would clash to centre console on engaging 4th gear, heater needed a kick to start spinning, and the clutch arm broke on my drive which was gearbox out job to replace, at which point I scrapped it. It was relatively comfy though.
Great design feature that you had to disassemble the front hubs to replace the brake discs...
Not experienced other Rover's personally, but the 800-series are decent, and the older stuff is quite attractive - would love a P6 or P5b!
Never heard of broken clutch forks on the PG1 gearbox, but the other 2 things were snags. The gear linkage thing was caused by wear in the gear linkage and cost about £30 to sort. The front hub design was a Honda feature but the whole wheel bearing carrier was just held on to the knuckle by 4 bolts.Yes, it was *that* bad. Worst wood-style plastic I've seen, gear stick would clash to centre console on engaging 4th gear, heater needed a kick to start spinning, and the clutch arm broke on my drive which was gearbox out job to replace, at which point I scrapped it. It was relatively comfy though.
Great design feature that you had to disassemble the front hubs to replace the brake discs...
Not experienced other Rover's personally, but the 800-series are decent, and the older stuff is quite attractive - would love a P6 or P5b!
You must have had a lot of very new cars if wood trim, a sloppy gear linkage and a clutch failure are the worst things that have ever happened to you in your driving career!
Looking Back
Dad had a 2600SE SD1. Was ok - but when Top Gear showed the door opening leaving the trim attached - that was not a joke.
He had a 2.0 Montego MG Efi (Not Turbo). Was a tad small but don't recall anything breaking.
He had a few 800 Vitesse models (both 2.7 and 2.0 Turbo). They were decent cars but a joint within the windscreen wiper mechanism went on all of the cars. Would have been nice for them to have update the failing part at some point.
Dad had a 2600SE SD1. Was ok - but when Top Gear showed the door opening leaving the trim attached - that was not a joke.
He had a 2.0 Montego MG Efi (Not Turbo). Was a tad small but don't recall anything breaking.
He had a few 800 Vitesse models (both 2.7 and 2.0 Turbo). They were decent cars but a joint within the windscreen wiper mechanism went on all of the cars. Would have been nice for them to have update the failing part at some point.
jamieduff1981 said:
Never heard of broken clutch forks on the PG1 gearbox, but the other 2 things were snags. The gear linkage thing was caused by wear in the gear linkage and cost about £30 to sort. The front hub design was a Honda feature but the whole wheel bearing carrier was just held on to the knuckle by 4 bolts.
You must have had a lot of very new cars if wood trim, a sloppy gear linkage and a clutch failure are the worst things that have ever happened to you in your driving career!
Never said it was the worst motoring thing that happened to me. I've had seats drop out the floor due to rust, had engines explode catastrophically, bonnets fly off, many components including wheels and exhausts fall off the car, all of which I didn't experience with the Rover, to its credit.You must have had a lot of very new cars if wood trim, a sloppy gear linkage and a clutch failure are the worst things that have ever happened to you in your driving career!
It was a cheap runaround for me, so I wasn't particularly attached to it. I just know that when I replaced it with a Passat of a similar vintage, the Passat was a better car in most respects. And I'm far from a VW fan..
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff