Rover 75 auto
Author
Discussion

steve-5snwi

Original Poster:

9,894 posts

115 months

Sunday 1st October 2017
quotequote all
I'm currently looking at something to replace the a4 station car that we currently have, I want something a little more useful. Ideally a 9-5 aero estate but apparently that's not happening. I've found what looks like a reasonable 75 tourer conni, it's the 2.5 auto, it must be auto and must be petrol.....

The a4 is ok but I find it uncomfortable and being a saloon it's not great for diy .... It's not too bad on fuel though and reasonably well screwed together.

Has anyone lived with a 75, any tips on what to look for and are they any good ?

steve-5snwi

Original Poster:

9,894 posts

115 months

Monday 2nd October 2017
quotequote all
Nobody has owned the 75 auto frown

dai1983

3,151 posts

171 months

Monday 2nd October 2017
quotequote all
I've been considering one or it's rivals for a while. Things I've found:

-Rear upper arms corroding
-Brake pipes
-Rear sills
- 3(!!!) Timing belts
-Variable intake motors
-Plastic thermostat housing
-Apparently the very early ones came with the most special items but the middle (Y plate) are meant to be better built. The later ones started being built to a cost and the facelift is bloody ugly.
-I don't mind the looks of the ZT but a 75 on 15 inch rims appeals.
-35mpg on a run appear fly as the torque converter locks at a steady speed and decreases the engine revs

Personally I know a diesel tourer would make more sense but I love the look of the saloons arse end!

SL22

204 posts

147 months

Monday 2nd October 2017
quotequote all
steve-5snwi said:
Nobody has owned the 75 auto frown
Yes, the 4.6 V8 one they did in very small numbers. I did also have a 2.5 V6 auto for a short while (it was a special long wheel base one, again made in very limited numbers, so held its value). As mentioned above there are some niggles with the engine and the timing belts are considered an expensive job (£500+) so on a cheap car they might not get done. Overall, very comfy, and feels quite ‘classic’ and not that modern. Auto box was nice and smooth. They, being old cars now are likely to ‘need things doing’ and it’s whether that’s what you want, or something less hassle. They do have a very strong set of owners clubs.

Sir Bagalot

6,866 posts

203 months

Tuesday 3rd October 2017
quotequote all
Google 75 ZT Forum, they know lots overthere

sjc

15,649 posts

292 months

sjc

15,649 posts

292 months

Tuesday 3rd October 2017
quotequote all
I'm on my second V6, done about 140k miles over 8 years in them.
What would you like to know ?

jamiebae

6,245 posts

233 months

Tuesday 3rd October 2017
quotequote all
dai1983 said:
I've been considering one or it's rivals for a while. Things I've found:

-Rear upper arms corroding
-Brake pipes
-Rear sills
- 3(!!!) Timing belts
-Variable intake motors
-Plastic thermostat housing
-Apparently the very early ones came with the most special items but the middle (Y plate) are meant to be better built. The later ones started being built to a cost and the facelift is bloody ugly.
-I don't mind the looks of the ZT but a 75 on 15 inch rims appeals.
-35mpg on a run appear fly as the torque converter locks at a steady speed and decreases the engine revs

Personally I know a diesel tourer would make more sense but I love the look of the saloons arse end!
As I understand it the first cars were built at Cowley, but when BMW sold Rover they kept the Oxford plant and shifted 75 production to Longbridge, which had just been refitted in preparation to build the Mini. Longbridge cars are reported to be better built, but then as MG Rover started to struggle they indulged in some pretty savage cost-reduction exercises and component cost reductions.

As for that car, the V6 timing belt is a pain, a lot of people just choose to ignore it and hope it doesn't break as the cars are borderline worthless anyway.

I guess you're talking SOTW money or less here so just buy on condition and hope for the best.