British Leyland -They were crap and they knew they were.
Discussion
MGJohn said:
OTOH, Taxis at my local station about twenty five years ago and later. The majority being Montego 2 litre EFi. Every one white as required by the local councils. When picking up visiting relatives whilst waiting for the trains to arrive, I'd get talking to the drivers in the line of Montegos waiting for the London train to arrive. Those cars all completed starship mileages. So were they BL or ARG products ?... and how come they completed all those miles.
In the only monthly car magazine I regularly buy, Car mechanics, they sometimes run features on cars completing in excess of 200,000 miles. One car featured was a Montego. It was and maybe still is showing in excess of 800,000 miles.
Posted purely in the interests of balance.
Judging a car as a success because it can reach high millages in a short space of time from new in not the way to do it, a car that lasts will go through 3 or 4 owners and then 10 years later be still able of passing 150K, i gaurentee maybe 1 of that fleet of Montegos survived past 5 years old cos lets face it the engine was the best part of em, sIn the only monthly car magazine I regularly buy, Car mechanics, they sometimes run features on cars completing in excess of 200,000 miles. One car featured was a Montego. It was and maybe still is showing in excess of 800,000 miles.
Posted purely in the interests of balance.
te car, good engine and if it was a VP with the talking dash they would have caught fire by 4 years old as did quite a few i used to service back in the day, i can still hear my maestro VP, "electrical overload, please switch of engine, bing, bing, bing" every time i turned the rear heated window on and the wipers at the same time.One thing i will say in the defence of the Montego is, a few quirks aside like wheel bearings with more play than a shool play time, gearboxes set to self destruct from the factory, electrics that were haunted by the most anoying ghost ever (most likely the ghost of a disgruntled production line worker full of spite cos the managment wouldn't buy the soft loo rols or biccy with the cream filling) it was on par ewith the SDi as one of the best cars BL, austin/rover ever made but the fact remians that isn't really much of an accolade, it's like saying treading in white crusty poodle s
t is better than treading in runny alsatian st, either way your in the st.Now before you detract off into a SoWhat hates all things british, stone him to death, he hates the country, i'd like to add "b
ks" BL made crap cars, the small amount that survive are a testiment to that simple fact and no amount of nationalfront esq slagging off of thier detractors will ever change that, i love britain but never have loved BL products and for a good reason i owned em and worked on them constantly, see the differance ?sorry i'm not a jingoistic lover of all things british it's just BL come way down my list of Fav british products.
I wil agree to agree that BL should not be held up as a standard to which british products should be judged, we do make great things, it's just we tend give them away to others to make a name out of, now that is something to jump on and thrash out in a forum over the next few weeks.
SystemParanoia said:
Doesnt tata/labdrover own the rover name, whilst bmw have hoarded the majority of the other bl name with china having mg for some reason..
so maybe rover will return someday?
:lol:
That's sort of correct, BMW actually have the Triumph and Riley names as well as anything pertaining to the Mini brand, such as "Mini Metro". Chinese SAIC through their acquisition of NAC find themselves owning Austin, Morris, Wolseley and various other BL names as well as MG. Landrover owns the Rover name but I can't see it ever returning now.so maybe rover will return someday?
:lol:
MJK 24 said:
I think some people are being quite harsh on Rover. In my opinion, they produced some competitive cars on ever diminishing resources.
Take the Rover 214 launched in 1990 ish. K series. All alloy 16v twin cam with multipoint injection. Pretty sure they had independent rear suspension on this car. What was the competition? Well the Mk3 Golf was launched twelve months later. The entry level 1.4 had an iron block 8v mated to a 4 speed gearbox. Independent rear suspension would have to wait a further 13 years for the arrival of the Mk5 in 2004. No doubt the Golf was much more expensive despite it's more primitive specification. If you wanted to compare in list price, the Mk5 Escort felt a decade older than the 200 by comparison. Rough as anything CVH engines, no brakes and dreadful handling. In smaller cars, the K series punches well above its weight. A 214 16v would easily keep up with a Mk3 Golf GTI 8v despite it being a 2.0 engine. If I was to criticise the 200 and 400 from this era, I'd say that they could have put a little more effort into the styling. They seemed to date quite quickly.
Anyone who's driven a Metro with the 214 16v engine in will know that there's no shortage of performance available!
People seem to be quick to berate the Montego from the 80's. Let's get some perspective, they weren't competing with the Mercedes 190. The Montego was probably two thirds the price if that. The Montego was essentially up against the Sierra which was as old as the hills in its mechanical specification. Yes, the Sierra was a reliable car. But so was the Montego. The 2.0 diesel was a little noisy from a cold start but had plenty of poke compared to the equivalent Sierra and was capable of 200k. I think it was a Perkins diesel? The MG Turbo was a bit of a flying machine I seem to recall. Montego's rusted as the approached old age but only if you let them. Equivalent Sierra's, Cavaliers and Passat's would also rust as they approached old age. Again, only if you let them.
The Maestro was up against the Mk2 Golf I suppose. The Maestro was much bigger inside. I always thought they looked a little awkward in their styling. Were they as good as a Mk2 Golf? No, not really. Were they the same price as a Mk2 Golf? No, they were much cheaper. Always need to use a little perspective! They were perfectly decent for the money. Again, the MG Turbo was a flyer and the 2.0 diesel would run forever.
The 600 was a top effort by Rover. Passat quality at Mondeo money. Very good looking car, has dated very well,
Spacious, nice interiors, rust resident and a big boot. They had no problems whatsoever in selling these. Shame they didn't broaden their horizons with an estate.
The 800 was huge value for money. A 7 series BMW sized interior for 3 series money. The 827 (yes, I know it's a Honda engine) was sublime. Compared it to a 2.9 V6 Granada which had all the refinement of a 4 cylinder diesel in comparison. The leather in a Rover 800 was of equal quality to anything coming out of Germany for half as much money again. Sold in big numbers.
The 75 was possibly more of a revelation when it arrived than the 600 was. Quality was first rate. It was launched at the same time as the E46 BMW and I'd argue in certain areas such as interior quality and rust resistance, was ahead of the then in house rival. Unfortunately the interior was attacked by the accountants as the 75 went through its life which was a shame. The 75 won numerous design awards around the world from the motor industry including from Germany and Japan.
I guess what let them down in the end was an ageing product range without any real investment or meaningful product planning. Also, other manufacturers upped their game considerably. The Mk1 Focus was a great drive and very reliable. It was starting to make the 25 look behind the times just as the 200 did to the Escort a decade earlier.
As some of the more mainstream manufacturers upped their game in the early 2000's, IMO Germany have dropped their ball in a big way. Mercedes rusting away to nothing. BMW suffering turbo and timing chain issues along with rusty brake lines and errant electrics. As for the Volkswagen Audi 2.0 TDI, what an unmitigated disaster of an engine. The engineers who designed the previous 1.9 TDI that was (much) more economical, reliable and had far greater longevity must be pulling their hair out. German quality is nothing like what it was in the 80's unfortunately and that's a crying shame. They're still managing to charge strong money for their products though so maybe they know something I don't!
When thinking back to Rover, perspective is the key!
Really?Take the Rover 214 launched in 1990 ish. K series. All alloy 16v twin cam with multipoint injection. Pretty sure they had independent rear suspension on this car. What was the competition? Well the Mk3 Golf was launched twelve months later. The entry level 1.4 had an iron block 8v mated to a 4 speed gearbox. Independent rear suspension would have to wait a further 13 years for the arrival of the Mk5 in 2004. No doubt the Golf was much more expensive despite it's more primitive specification. If you wanted to compare in list price, the Mk5 Escort felt a decade older than the 200 by comparison. Rough as anything CVH engines, no brakes and dreadful handling. In smaller cars, the K series punches well above its weight. A 214 16v would easily keep up with a Mk3 Golf GTI 8v despite it being a 2.0 engine. If I was to criticise the 200 and 400 from this era, I'd say that they could have put a little more effort into the styling. They seemed to date quite quickly.
Anyone who's driven a Metro with the 214 16v engine in will know that there's no shortage of performance available!
People seem to be quick to berate the Montego from the 80's. Let's get some perspective, they weren't competing with the Mercedes 190. The Montego was probably two thirds the price if that. The Montego was essentially up against the Sierra which was as old as the hills in its mechanical specification. Yes, the Sierra was a reliable car. But so was the Montego. The 2.0 diesel was a little noisy from a cold start but had plenty of poke compared to the equivalent Sierra and was capable of 200k. I think it was a Perkins diesel? The MG Turbo was a bit of a flying machine I seem to recall. Montego's rusted as the approached old age but only if you let them. Equivalent Sierra's, Cavaliers and Passat's would also rust as they approached old age. Again, only if you let them.
The Maestro was up against the Mk2 Golf I suppose. The Maestro was much bigger inside. I always thought they looked a little awkward in their styling. Were they as good as a Mk2 Golf? No, not really. Were they the same price as a Mk2 Golf? No, they were much cheaper. Always need to use a little perspective! They were perfectly decent for the money. Again, the MG Turbo was a flyer and the 2.0 diesel would run forever.
The 600 was a top effort by Rover. Passat quality at Mondeo money. Very good looking car, has dated very well,
Spacious, nice interiors, rust resident and a big boot. They had no problems whatsoever in selling these. Shame they didn't broaden their horizons with an estate.
The 800 was huge value for money. A 7 series BMW sized interior for 3 series money. The 827 (yes, I know it's a Honda engine) was sublime. Compared it to a 2.9 V6 Granada which had all the refinement of a 4 cylinder diesel in comparison. The leather in a Rover 800 was of equal quality to anything coming out of Germany for half as much money again. Sold in big numbers.
The 75 was possibly more of a revelation when it arrived than the 600 was. Quality was first rate. It was launched at the same time as the E46 BMW and I'd argue in certain areas such as interior quality and rust resistance, was ahead of the then in house rival. Unfortunately the interior was attacked by the accountants as the 75 went through its life which was a shame. The 75 won numerous design awards around the world from the motor industry including from Germany and Japan.
I guess what let them down in the end was an ageing product range without any real investment or meaningful product planning. Also, other manufacturers upped their game considerably. The Mk1 Focus was a great drive and very reliable. It was starting to make the 25 look behind the times just as the 200 did to the Escort a decade earlier.
As some of the more mainstream manufacturers upped their game in the early 2000's, IMO Germany have dropped their ball in a big way. Mercedes rusting away to nothing. BMW suffering turbo and timing chain issues along with rusty brake lines and errant electrics. As for the Volkswagen Audi 2.0 TDI, what an unmitigated disaster of an engine. The engineers who designed the previous 1.9 TDI that was (much) more economical, reliable and had far greater longevity must be pulling their hair out. German quality is nothing like what it was in the 80's unfortunately and that's a crying shame. They're still managing to charge strong money for their products though so maybe they know something I don't!
When thinking back to Rover, perspective is the key!
you going to use the K series engine as PLUSS point
oh my aching sides.Yes the golf had an iron blocked 8V engine, an engine that didn't eat head gaskets, and would run for 100K before needing any work on it
I will totaly agree the Mk5 escort was as woefull as a puppy who's just been caught crapping on the carpet, horrable rusting POS with the bloody CVH, Mk6 was better (which is why my wife has a M6 not a Mk5) but that's what ford did and BL didn't, they learned from thier cockups.
We had a 91 420, nice car, very nice car, a bit too japaneese for me (mainly cos it was) and the head gasket leaked constantly, took it to a dealer he just said tighten the bolts a bit more, that's what we do
Metro 214, yes it went ok till it didn't, which was rather early in it's life cycle, (research K-seal and discover why it was invented).
Moteago, one of thier best efforts but i notice you have choosen a perkins diesel (the only engine that really lasted that well in the range and a good engine at that) my sierra is on 247K it's also a diesel ? i will admit the perkins is a better engine, i have to bow to superior tech on that one,
but diesel engines aside the sierra was still a better car, old tech or not, dont confuse more advanced with better, spec had nowt to do with it, there are more sierras still on the road, the reason as i see it (from a mechanics point of veiw) is that BL products took more "not letting them desolve/fail/breakdown" than the equivilent products from other manufacturers of the time.
By the time we get into the 600 we are well into non BL terratory, we are into existing honda developed cars re badged, TBH the 2/420 was the same so not really worthy of inclusion in the argument over BL products IMHO.
S0 What said:
Now before you detract off into a SoWhat hates all things british, stone him to death, he hates the country, i'd like to add "bks" BL made crap cars, the small amount that survive are a testiment to that simple fact and no amount of nationalfront esq slagging off of thier detractors will ever change that, i love britain but never have loved BL products and for a good reason i owned em and worked on them constantly, see the differance ?
If you exclude exotica which has almost always had a high enough value to be worth preserving there are very few cars left from the BL era from any manufacturer so that statement is pretty invalid as an argument in this context.ks" BL made crap cars, the small amount that survive are a testiment to that simple fact and no amount of nationalfront esq slagging off of thier detractors will ever change that, i love britain but never have loved BL products and for a good reason i owned em and worked on them constantly, see the differance ?MGJohn said:
drivin_me_nuts said:
.
Out of curiosity what was the defining car of the BL era, assuming there was one: one that summaries all that is best of any era.
.
Impossible for me to say. So many cars and a huge variation of different types and hard also to define the BL era. I only ever bought one new car with the actual BL badged logo on it and that was one of the most reliable cars I ever had. Had a hard life as I travelled much in my work back then.Out of curiosity what was the defining car of the BL era, assuming there was one: one that summaries all that is best of any era.
.
During my lifetime, any era .... what defining "BL" car?
I would say the original Issigonis Mini but strictly speaking, that was designed and created prior to the formation of the brief BL period.
TBH the mini to me is the mini not a BL product, it stands head and shoulders over nearly all other cars of the period no matter the manufacturer, in fact i often forget who made them, they seem to have an existance of thier own with the manufacturer being allmost second place to that name, Mini, great car, losy my virginity in one
andyps said:
S0 What said:
Now before you detract off into a SoWhat hates all things british, stone him to death, he hates the country, i'd like to add "bks" BL made crap cars, the small amount that survive are a testiment to that simple fact and no amount of nationalfront esq slagging off of thier detractors will ever change that, i love britain but never have loved BL products and for a good reason i owned em and worked on them constantly, see the differance ?
If you exclude exotica which has almost always had a high enough value to be worth preserving there are very few cars left from the BL era from any manufacturer so that statement is pretty invalid as an argument in this context.ks" BL made crap cars, the small amount that survive are a testiment to that simple fact and no amount of nationalfront esq slagging off of thier detractors will ever change that, i love britain but never have loved BL products and for a good reason i owned em and worked on them constantly, see the differance ?edited cos i cant spell!
S0 What said:
Really?
you going to use the K series engine as PLUSS point oh my aching sides.
Yes the golf had an iron blocked 8V engine, an engine that didn't eat head gaskets, and would run for 100K before needing any work on it
It's not a bad engine it was just put together by idiots. Plastic dowels, poor gasket design, porous heads and sinking liners. To add to its troubles they decided a Freelander installation would be a good idea you going to use the K series engine as PLUSS point
oh my aching sides.Yes the golf had an iron blocked 8V engine, an engine that didn't eat head gaskets, and would run for 100K before needing any work on it
. Even at this point if the dealers had been any good (they weren't) the cars could have been fixed at a reasonable cost. Instead repeat failures occurred, even worse many of them decided that skimming the head was a great idea but in many cars this opened up the voids in the casting and if the liners weren't at their correct protrusion (most weren't) no amount of gasket changes would hold up for long. As for the Golf they weren't perfect and ate oil pumps. The difference was that VW took them in fixed them and kept the customers happy.Slag Rover off all you like, there's plenty of material to work with there, but the K
it is a fantastic engine that is still used in motorsports today due to its compact size and class leading power to weight. I personally prefer something like a B18 as they just rev and rev but I respect the K for what it is and it's one of Rovers better pieces of design. It's just a shame they didn't invest the money in the build and QC and that some of the cars that it was installed in were as dull as dishwater.king arthur said:
SystemParanoia said:
Doesnt tata/labdrover own the rover name, whilst bmw have hoarded the majority of the other bl name with china having mg for some reason..
so maybe rover will return someday?
:lol:
That's sort of correct, BMW actually have the Triumph and Riley names as well as anything pertaining to the Mini brand, such as "Mini Metro". Chinese SAIC through their acquisition of NAC find themselves owning Austin, Morris, Wolseley and various other BL names as well as MG. Landrover owns the Rover name but I can't see it ever returning now.so maybe rover will return someday?
:lol:
thanks for clearing that up.
i potentially can see rover returning.. possibly.. maybe..
as with the ever tightening CO2 rules and regs and with LR / JAG selling higher and higher volumes, they may have to bring rover in as a way to lower their overall C02 score as a business.
maybe a Rover/Tata NANO diesel
like Aston Martin have with that Toyota IQ abomination
The K was a cracking little engine- I had a 1.4 130bhp and a 1,8 160 bhp in Caterhams for 60k miles and both ran perfectly; fantasically revvy, great noise and sweet as a nut. HGF was an issue for some but by no means all.In ultimate spec these would push out 230bhp plus- but did need the occasional refresh. And no, the revtastic Honda S2000 didn't need refreshing and never ever broke so far as I can gather
S0 What said:
MGJohn said:
drivin_me_nuts said:
.
Out of curiosity what was the defining car of the BL era, assuming there was one: one that summaries all that is best of any era.
.
Impossible for me to say. So many cars and a huge variation of different types and hard also to define the BL era. I only ever bought one new car with the actual BL badged logo on it and that was one of the most reliable cars I ever had. Had a hard life as I travelled much in my work back then.Out of curiosity what was the defining car of the BL era, assuming there was one: one that summaries all that is best of any era.
.
During my lifetime, any era .... what defining "BL" car?
I would say the original Issigonis Mini but strictly speaking, that was designed and created prior to the formation of the brief BL period.
TBH the mini to me is the mini not a BL product, it stands head and shoulders over nearly all other cars of the period no matter the manufacturer, in fact i often forget who made them, they seem to have an existance of thier own with the manufacturer being allmost second place to that name, Mini, great car, lost my virginity in one
S0 What said:
Really? have a count of haw many fords there are from that period and then tell me it's invalid, i'd stick my neck out and say there 4 to 1 fords left on the road to BL 3 to 1 to vauxhall, and 2 to 1 of all the rest added together, how is it invalid when we are compairing cars from that period to say there are more cars left from manufacturer A than manufacturer B or manufacturer C.
edited cos i cant spell!
Without a strict definition of periods it is not possible to comment accurately but they are all pretty scarce. Also, depending on the period being considered, Ford and Vauxhall outsold BL products so percentage left is important. When did you last see a Cortina for example, or a rwd Escort that wasn't being used in Motorsport? Also worth watching this - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-22525103edited cos i cant spell!
MJK 24 said:
I think some people are being quite harsh on Rover. In my opinion, they produced some competitive cars on ever diminishing resources.
Take the Rover 214 launched in 1990 ish...
I had one of these as my first car. It was a good car and the head gasket stayed intact in the 18 months I owned it.Take the Rover 214 launched in 1990 ish...
You've listed a load of 1980s and 90s cars (mostly) relying on Honda design and engineering, with the notable exception of the K series engine.
The thread has drifted - this was about BL in the 1970s...
Why does everyone have to call BL? Truthfully what car did they make that was without merit?
The Marina, (and later Ital), i will accept. They were every bit as dire as the Escort mk1 and 2 which are worshipped as if Allah herself drove one. The Chevette was probably the king in this battle but had the ancient 1256cc pushrod snotter for an engine. (Bit like the A series but BL had the OHC O series).
The problem was the workforce and weak management. The designs were generally very good. Someone mentioned the Hydrogas suspension. An excellent system. Great ride and can still corner.
Some very inovative design. The Princess, much maligned, what competition? A shonky Cortina or Granada rotting away on cart springs? Even the Allegro, yes it was a bit rubbish in some ways but they actually drove well and BL weren't scared to try and innovate.
If it wasn't for BL we would all possibly be driving cart sprung OHV st, only competitors for inovating woould be Renault and Ctireon.
The Marina, (and later Ital), i will accept. They were every bit as dire as the Escort mk1 and 2 which are worshipped as if Allah herself drove one. The Chevette was probably the king in this battle but had the ancient 1256cc pushrod snotter for an engine. (Bit like the A series but BL had the OHC O series).
The problem was the workforce and weak management. The designs were generally very good. Someone mentioned the Hydrogas suspension. An excellent system. Great ride and can still corner.
Some very inovative design. The Princess, much maligned, what competition? A shonky Cortina or Granada rotting away on cart springs? Even the Allegro, yes it was a bit rubbish in some ways but they actually drove well and BL weren't scared to try and innovate.
If it wasn't for BL we would all possibly be driving cart sprung OHV s
t, only competitors for inovating woould be Renault and Ctireon. Nurse! said:
Why does everyone have to call BL? Truthfully what car did they make that was without merit?
The Marina, (and later Ital), i will accept. They were every bit as dire as the Escort mk1 and 2 which are worshipped as if Allah herself drove one. The Chevette was probably the king in this battle but had the ancient 1256cc pushrod snotter for an engine. (Bit like the A series but BL had the OHC O series).
The problem was the workforce and weak management. The designs were generally very good. Someone mentioned the Hydrogas suspension. An excellent system. Great ride and can still corner.
Some very inovative design. The Princess, much maligned, what competition? A shonky Cortina or Granada rotting away on cart springs? Even the Allegro, yes it was a bit rubbish in some ways but they actually drove well and BL weren't scared to try and innovate.
If it wasn't for BL we would all possibly be driving cart sprung OHV st, only competitors for inovating woould be Renault and Ctireon.
Good grief! Having just read that, I've come over a bit 'iffy'. Not feeing myself .. The Marina, (and later Ital), i will accept. They were every bit as dire as the Escort mk1 and 2 which are worshipped as if Allah herself drove one. The Chevette was probably the king in this battle but had the ancient 1256cc pushrod snotter for an engine. (Bit like the A series but BL had the OHC O series).
The problem was the workforce and weak management. The designs were generally very good. Someone mentioned the Hydrogas suspension. An excellent system. Great ride and can still corner.
Some very inovative design. The Princess, much maligned, what competition? A shonky Cortina or Granada rotting away on cart springs? Even the Allegro, yes it was a bit rubbish in some ways but they actually drove well and BL weren't scared to try and innovate.
If it wasn't for BL we would all possibly be driving cart sprung OHV s
t, only competitors for inovating woould be Renault and Ctireon. Need to report to the MO first thing. Nurse even.Nice one Nurse! ...
Nurse! said:
Why does everyone have to call BL? Truthfully what car did they make that was without merit?
The Marina, (and later Ital), i will accept. They were every bit as dire as the Escort mk1 and 2 which are worshipped as if Allah herself drove one. The Chevette was probably the king in this battle but had the ancient 1256cc pushrod snotter for an engine. (Bit like the A series but BL had the OHC O series).
The problem was the workforce and weak management. The designs were generally very good. Someone mentioned the Hydrogas suspension. An excellent system. Great ride and can still corner.
Some very inovative design. The Princess, much maligned, what competition? A shonky Cortina or Granada rotting away on cart springs? Even the Allegro, yes it was a bit rubbish in some ways but they actually drove well and BL weren't scared to try and innovate.
If it wasn't for BL we would all possibly be driving cart sprung OHV st, only competitors for inovating woould be Renault and Ctireon.
I had a 15 year old Allegro given to me back in the late 80s by my Auntie maybe it didnt look much in the way of a design classic and my younger brother didnt like getting picked up from school in it but it handled lovely on the Hydrolastic suspension and was really economical and reliable and rust free.The Marina, (and later Ital), i will accept. They were every bit as dire as the Escort mk1 and 2 which are worshipped as if Allah herself drove one. The Chevette was probably the king in this battle but had the ancient 1256cc pushrod snotter for an engine. (Bit like the A series but BL had the OHC O series).
The problem was the workforce and weak management. The designs were generally very good. Someone mentioned the Hydrogas suspension. An excellent system. Great ride and can still corner.
Some very inovative design. The Princess, much maligned, what competition? A shonky Cortina or Granada rotting away on cart springs? Even the Allegro, yes it was a bit rubbish in some ways but they actually drove well and BL weren't scared to try and innovate.
If it wasn't for BL we would all possibly be driving cart sprung OHV s
t, only competitors for inovating woould be Renault and Ctireon. I never had an issue with that car and the A series was bomb proof like MG John has said previously the cars weren't all that bad.
Audi are even trying to copy The Allegro steering wheel design
yonex said:
So without BL nobody would have innovated?
Nonsense.
They could but didn't pretty much. Nonsense.
Name a manufacturer who did back then. We were world leaders in design.
Even in the last days, BMW had to kill the MGF as it was so much better than the Z3. The 75 again challenged the 5 series. The Range Rover was world class and nothing could compete.
Anyone else remember the track day MGR put on where they supplied to attending journolists and racing drivers both MG-ZTs and BMW 320 sports models (chosen as it was as close in price range as they could get it) and asked them to have fun and give anonymous feedback at the end of the day?
Overwhelmingly, the ZT came out as by far the better car. Much surprising even the diehard BMW fans who were there.
Rumour was that someone at MGR got their backside served to them by the Bavarian overlords when word got back to Germany about it. Well, not much of a rumour, more a guaranteed, as I know one of the lads who organised it. They writing was on the wall by then though, and he and the rest of the team who worked there knew they were going to get backstabbed no matter what they did, so why not have some fun?
Still, all ancient history now. It's gone and for better or worse, they ain't coming back.
Overwhelmingly, the ZT came out as by far the better car. Much surprising even the diehard BMW fans who were there.
Rumour was that someone at MGR got their backside served to them by the Bavarian overlords when word got back to Germany about it. Well, not much of a rumour, more a guaranteed, as I know one of the lads who organised it. They writing was on the wall by then though, and he and the rest of the team who worked there knew they were going to get backstabbed no matter what they did, so why not have some fun?
Still, all ancient history now. It's gone and for better or worse, they ain't coming back.
Vince70 said:
.
I never had an issue with that car and the A series was bomb proof like MG John has said previously the cars weren't all that bad.
Audi are even trying to copy The Allegro steering wheel design
.
... Copy cats .. I never had an issue with that car and the A series was bomb proof like MG John has said previously the cars weren't all that bad.
Audi are even trying to copy The Allegro steering wheel design
.
Actually, although I have much difficulty lining up my two remaining grey memory cells on account of extreme agedness, I believe that "Quartic" shaped steering wheel was available on cars before some early Allegros first had them.
The Yanks had it on some of their cars some years before.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff