Rover 75 V8 thoughts?

[astec815]

What are peoples thoughts on this car?

I've heard alot about the ZT 260, but not so much about the rover version (yes I know they are the same car virtually).

Looking at some websites, a fully kitted one costs just 20k (including sat nav and tv etc) and it looks good imo:





So what are peoples thoughts on this car?

Its reasonably fast (0-60 <7 seconds) 150 ish mph top speed, quiet etc.

Do you think that it would have sold well if Rover hadnt gone into administration.

The only thing I would change would be to tune the engine a little better to get better performance/mpg from it.

[towman]

The MG version appears to be cheaper

[King Herald]

astec815 said:

........The only thing I would change would be to tune the engine a little better to get better performance/mpg from it.

Yes, quite. One can't go poodling around at a mere 150mph, can one?

[red_rover]

Gorgous car. I have driven a 75 prototype that was driven around longbridge 24/7 for several months for testing. This involved having three different teams driving the car and only stopping for the teams to get out and for the car to be refueled.

Not as fast as you might think for a 4.6V8. The best way to think of it is as a modern day P5 V8, and not a SD1 Vitesse replacement. Brilliant car but make sure you're happy to dig deep for those fuel bills!



Road test here: www.austin-rover.co.uk/r40v8drivef.htm

Courtesy of austin-rover.co.uk

Edited by red_rover on Sunday 15th October 22:42

[stigcv8]

my thoughts?

ok, here goes

WHAT ARE YOU THINKNG? Its a rover, they are bust, you are about to spend 20k on a car that has an uncertain future and a dubious past? AT that money if you want a v8 go down to Vauxhall and buy a monaro.

[astec815]

yes it does, but doesnt the zt have quite harsh low speed ride?


The 75 V8 has a better looking interior (im a slut for wood and cream leather lol) and is better looking overall. The styling of the ZT never really fit the 75 body on which it was based.

[astec815]

I dont have 2k, let alone 20 lol but its nice to think fellow PH'ers imagine me to be made of money.

Who knows what the future holds regarding rover SAIC and Nanging, but I think its a bit of a bargin imo and you can get them with full comprehensive warrenties.

[cymtriks]

stigcv8 said:

my thoughts?

ok, here goes

WHAT ARE YOU THINKNG? Its a rover, they are bust, you are about to spend 20k on a car that has an uncertain future and a dubious past? AT that money if you want a v8 go down to Vauxhall and buy a monaro.

I didn't think parts supply was a problem? Does anyone know for certain?

I've rather fancied an MG version.

[red_rover]

Lets remember that FORD own Rover now. SIAC only own the blueprints to the 75.

There have been a lot of rumours that Rover will most certainly return.

And as for dubious past, I give you three cars that defined Britain perfectly in their time;






That 75 V8 is pure class. Unassuming,charasmatic and unashamedly British.

Also worth noticing, that less than 1,000 of these cars were produced. So you are guaranteed exclusivity!

Edited by red_rover on Sunday 15th October 22:56

[stigcv8]

I dont think anything of your bank balance I am just questioning your financial sanity looking at the Rover Sure the monaro will sink like the titanic but buy the rover and it would sink quicker than the hood.

For like for like the monaro would get you pretty much everywhere appart from getting a tv and fake wood trim, but if you only have 2k to spend may I direct sirs eyes this way...


http://trabant.shocauto.com/images/Tr

its a special limousine

[willdew]

astec815 said:

yes it does, but doesnt the zt have quite harsh low speed ride?


The 75 V8 has a better looking interior (im a slut for wood and cream leather lol) and is better looking overall. The styling of the ZT never really fit the 75 body on which it was based.

Yes, the ride is harsh at low speeds in the MG ZT. I own a 190 SE, which often feels too firm at low speeds (around speed humps of going over drains etc). Very good car though. If you're in the market for a mid/large saloon I'd say they're well worth a look. If you're looking to waft rather than for the sporty edge I'd think the Rover may be a good call.

[red_rover]

stigcv8 said:

I dont think anything of your bank balance I am just questioning your financial sanity looking at the Rover Sure the monaro will sink like the titanic but buy the rover and it would sink quicker than the hood.

For like for like the monaro would get you pretty much everywhere appart from getting a tv and fake wood trim, but if you only have 2k to spend may I direct sirs eyes this way...


http://trabant.shocauto.com/images/Tr

its a special limousine

Well, if you're a lover of cheap plastic interiors and max-powered exteriors, the Vauxhall might be the car to choose!

[astec815]

stigcv8 said:

I dont think anything of your bank balance I am just questioning your financial sanity looking at the Rover Sure the monaro will sink like the titanic but buy the rover and it would sink quicker than the hood.

For like for like the monaro would get you pretty much everywhere appart from getting a tv and fake wood trim, but if you only have 2k to spend may I direct sirs eyes this way...


http://trabant.shocauto.com/images/Tr

its a special limousine

Now thats sexy.....

Parts arnt an issue, body panels I think still are, you could always buy a damaged write off 75 as a doner car till the situation sorts itself out lol (now that is madness)

I wouldnt knock the monaro, its a good car regardless of the badge.

Edited by astec815 on Sunday 15th October 22:56

[DennisTheMenace]

Here is mr wang's wover
www.austin-rover.co.uk/index.htm?lc9indexf.htm

Id have that rover V8 not many about so it should get classic status pretty quickly , and still a damn fine car .

[stigcv8]

red_rover said:

And as for dubious past, I give you three cars that defined Britain perfectly in their time;

no arguments, some great cars there but interestinlgy you missed out:

metro
maestro
montego

[red_rover]

stigcv8 said:

red_rover said:

And as for dubious past, I give you three cars that defined Britain perfectly in their time;

no arguments, some great cars there but interestinlgy you missed out:

metro
maestro
montego

Well- no arguments -

Rover Metro - what car winner for 1990 and 1991
AUSTIN Maestro/ Stand alone model Maestro - never badged a Rover
AUSTIN Montego/ Stand alone Model Montego - Never badged a Rover.

Seemingly you get mixed up with Austin and Rover. And to be fair, the Maestro and Montego are completly exadurated when people start going off on about bad cars. They wouldn't know a bad car if it hit them on the head with a rotting exhaust pipe.

Edited by red_rover on Sunday 15th October 23:21

[red_rover]

DennisTheMenace said:

Here is mr wang's wover
www.austin-rover.co.uk/index.htm?lc9indexf.htm

Id have that rover V8 not many about so it should get classic status pretty quickly , and still a damn fine car .

Thats a Triumph. Why is it so hard for people to distinguish between marques!

[towman]

Hardly a triumph, more a minor victory.

[stigcv8]

red_rover said:

stigcv8 said:

red_rover said:

And as for dubious past, I give you three cars that defined Britain perfectly in their time;

no arguments, some great cars there but interestingly you missed out:

metro
maestro
montego

Well- no arguments -

Rover Metro - what car winner for 1990 and 1991
AUSTIN Maestro/ Stand alone model Maestro - never badged a Rover
AUSTIN Montego/ Stand alone Model Montego - Never badged a Rover.

Seemingly you get mixed up with Austin and Rover. And to be fair, the Maestro and Montego are completly exadurated when people start going off on about bad cars. They wouldn't know a bad car if it hit them on the head with a rotting exhaust pipe.

Edited by red_rover on Sunday 15th October 23:21

I'll bow to your knowledge but to claim an Austin as not being a Rover is like claiming a Triumph was never a Honda

Still you likes what you likes and thats cool for you, its different strokes for different folks but I'll stand by this when I say rover have only ever made 3 good cars and they were all pre 1980. The only redeeming factor for the SD was that it had the v8 There is no exhaduration when it comes to just how bad the montego or the metro was, there is no need for an argument on how bad they were either. To claim they were not as bad as people make out is the same as saying Pol Pot was actually a misunderstood leader who did many great things.

[towman]

Stigmund - just watched the vid on your home page. You are one lucky far car!