Best smoker barges 1-5 large [vol11]
Discussion
0a said:
I am fond of the 75, and like the concept but have 2 issues with it:
1. I tried to persuade a friend to buy one a few years ago. We want and saw 3 75s that looks good in the pictures, but all of them had major and multiple bits of trim hanging or falling off. We might have been unlucky, but I failed in my barge conversion mission and he ended up with a Mondeo - a car that just works. £800 and no trim falling off.
2. All in, purchase price, delivery and MOT bill, my Jag XJ8 was about £2k. I struggle to justify the 75 in light of this. MPG to date is 24mpg which isn't great, but I doubt the v6 75 is that much better, and in the context of running an old wafter MPG isn't a primary concern.
Just a bit on 75s as I've had 3.1. I tried to persuade a friend to buy one a few years ago. We want and saw 3 75s that looks good in the pictures, but all of them had major and multiple bits of trim hanging or falling off. We might have been unlucky, but I failed in my barge conversion mission and he ended up with a Mondeo - a car that just works. £800 and no trim falling off.
2. All in, purchase price, delivery and MOT bill, my Jag XJ8 was about £2k. I struggle to justify the 75 in light of this. MPG to date is 24mpg which isn't great, but I doubt the v6 75 is that much better, and in the context of running an old wafter MPG isn't a primary concern.
You will not, under any circumstances, ever, get timing belts done on a 6 cylinder car for £400. Whoever said that upthread is very wrong. Done well (by anyone you'd want touching something like this) it's £800. The receipts for mine indicated it was about £950.
You have, HAVE to get an early car. It's perverse when you think about other manufacturers ironing out issues over the years, but you really want a Cowley car with the black sills.
MPG on the 2.5v6 auto is very good. Cruise on at (indicated 70) and you'll get 37mpg. I struggled to make mine go under 35 on the A/B road slog.
Nope, it's not a Jag. But I reckon it's 100x easier to live with.
BorniteIdentity said:
You have, HAVE to get an early car. It's perverse when you think about other manufacturers ironing out issues over the years, but you really want a Cowley car with the black sills.
There is a web site somewhere that details the cost savings that crept in over the life of the 75, loads of little details that make the later cars a worse prospect, sort of a death by a 1000 cuts scenario.This one's quite good: http://www.the75andztclub.co.uk/forum/showthread.p...
BigBen said:
BorniteIdentity said:
You have, HAVE to get an early car. It's perverse when you think about other manufacturers ironing out issues over the years, but you really want a Cowley car with the black sills.
There is a web site somewhere that details the cost savings that crept in over the life of the 75, loads of little details that make the later cars a worse prospect, sort of a death by a 1000 cuts scenario.Don't think I could actually buy a 75 though. At least not this side of 40 and as for it being easier to live with than a Jag, I don't really understand. Sure a Jag would be thirsty and rather long and low, but parts are easy and £800 belt changes are not a thing.
I also can think of lots of other examples of cars where the early ones are the ones to have.
Krikkit said:
This one's quite good: http://www.the75andztclub.co.uk/forum/showthread.p...
"The unlock button on the car’s key fob was changed from the Rover symbol to a blank generic type"And yet they still went under. Amazing.
BorniteIdentity said:
Just a bit on 75s as I've had 3.
You will not, under any circumstances, ever, get timing belts done on a 6 cylinder car for £400. Whoever said that upthread is very wrong. Done well (by anyone you'd want touching something like this) it's £800. The receipts for mine indicated it was about £950.
You have, HAVE to get an early car. It's perverse when you think about other manufacturers ironing out issues over the years, but you really want a Cowley car with the black sills.
MPG on the 2.5v6 auto is very good. Cruise on at (indicated 70) and you'll get 37mpg. I struggled to make mine go under 35 on the A/B road slog.
Nope, it's not a Jag. But I reckon it's 100x easier to live with.
That mpg is pretty amazing for a '90s 6 cylinder! My BMW E36 328 is smaller and lighter than a 75 and manual to boot but the best I've seen is 35mpg on a long motorway run...You will not, under any circumstances, ever, get timing belts done on a 6 cylinder car for £400. Whoever said that upthread is very wrong. Done well (by anyone you'd want touching something like this) it's £800. The receipts for mine indicated it was about £950.
You have, HAVE to get an early car. It's perverse when you think about other manufacturers ironing out issues over the years, but you really want a Cowley car with the black sills.
MPG on the 2.5v6 auto is very good. Cruise on at (indicated 70) and you'll get 37mpg. I struggled to make mine go under 35 on the A/B road slog.
Nope, it's not a Jag. But I reckon it's 100x easier to live with.
That 540i in Bedale looks good for its mileage and if anyone wants it looked at next weekend I can go and do it.
Meanwhile in Merc v Porsche-land...
Their 928S4 weighed 1586kg kerb weight, 1757kg as tested (two up, half a tank of fuel).
The 500SL was 1892kg kerb, 2063kg as tested. So the SL was shifting 306 kg more for the acceleration runs, which is 17.4% heavier.
I'm working on the basis of 0-100 in between 14-15 secs for both cars, as that's where the proceeds of looking through the Brooklands compilations seem to fall for the early R129 and automatic examples of the S4. Autocar's 928S4 was significantly slower than their SL, though that SL seems to have been a little quicker than the Fast Lane and Car test examples which managed 0-100 in 15 rather than 14.
Meanwhile in Merc v Porsche-land...
Krikkit said:
I agree that they would've lowballed a little on the figures, as Porsche probably would as well.
Looking around I can only find figures to back up that the S4 is the quicker car - 100-200kg less weight and a slightly shorter final drive take care of that. They could also have a slightly different torque converter to alter the locking ratio etc, which would affect pick-up and acceleration from rest.
But isn't the weight difference more like twice that? Weight figures are hard to compare because of different standards and few magazines actually bothering to weigh the things, so the only place I can find where both cars were definitely tested to the same standard is Autocar. Looking around I can only find figures to back up that the S4 is the quicker car - 100-200kg less weight and a slightly shorter final drive take care of that. They could also have a slightly different torque converter to alter the locking ratio etc, which would affect pick-up and acceleration from rest.
Their 928S4 weighed 1586kg kerb weight, 1757kg as tested (two up, half a tank of fuel).
The 500SL was 1892kg kerb, 2063kg as tested. So the SL was shifting 306 kg more for the acceleration runs, which is 17.4% heavier.
I'm working on the basis of 0-100 in between 14-15 secs for both cars, as that's where the proceeds of looking through the Brooklands compilations seem to fall for the early R129 and automatic examples of the S4. Autocar's 928S4 was significantly slower than their SL, though that SL seems to have been a little quicker than the Fast Lane and Car test examples which managed 0-100 in 15 rather than 14.
Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 23 April 18:43
Krikkit said:
This one's quite good: http://www.the75andztclub.co.uk/forum/showthread.p...
Wow. They systematically turned that car into s
t, one tiny bit of penny pinching at a time. Proper salami tactics.Lowtimer said:
That 540i in Bedale looks good for its mileage and if anyone wants it looked at next weekend I can go and do it.
Meanwhile in Merc v Porsche-land...
Their 928S4 weighed 1586kg kerb weight, 1757kg as tested (two up, half a tank of fuel).
The 500SL was 1892kg kerb, 2063kg as tested. So the SL was shifting 306 kg more for the acceleration runs, which is 17.4% heavier.
I'm working on the basis of 0-100 in between 14-15 secs for both cars, as that's where the proceeds of looking through the Brooklands compilations seem to fall for the early R129 and automatic examples of the S4. Autocar's 928S4 was significantly slower than their SL, though that SL seems to have been a little quicker than the Fast Lane and Car test examples which managed 0-100 in 15 rather than 14.
There has been so much going on in Threadland. Oa's new Jag, CdeG's SLC (truly a Gentleman's Conveyance: what on earth are you doing with it?) and now this interesting treatise. Meanwhile in Merc v Porsche-land...
Krikkit said:
I agree that they would've lowballed a little on the figures, as Porsche probably would as well.
Looking around I can only find figures to back up that the S4 is the quicker car - 100-200kg less weight and a slightly shorter final drive take care of that. They could also have a slightly different torque converter to alter the locking ratio etc, which would affect pick-up and acceleration from rest.
But isn't the weight difference more like twice that? Weight figures are hard to compare because of different standards and few magazines actually bothering to weigh the things, so the only place I can find where both cars were definitely tested to the same standard is Autocar. Looking around I can only find figures to back up that the S4 is the quicker car - 100-200kg less weight and a slightly shorter final drive take care of that. They could also have a slightly different torque converter to alter the locking ratio etc, which would affect pick-up and acceleration from rest.
Their 928S4 weighed 1586kg kerb weight, 1757kg as tested (two up, half a tank of fuel).
The 500SL was 1892kg kerb, 2063kg as tested. So the SL was shifting 306 kg more for the acceleration runs, which is 17.4% heavier.
I'm working on the basis of 0-100 in between 14-15 secs for both cars, as that's where the proceeds of looking through the Brooklands compilations seem to fall for the early R129 and automatic examples of the S4. Autocar's 928S4 was significantly slower than their SL, though that SL seems to have been a little quicker than the Fast Lane and Car test examples which managed 0-100 in 15 rather than 14.
Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 23 April 18:43
Does anyone know how the gear ratios and final drive compare between SL 500 and 928 S4? I know the Porsche used the Merc box, but they were available with lots of different ratio set ups. I have to chip in, too, that my m113-engined SL 500 (306bhp) always seems a lot faster than its stated power output should allow. Doesn't the Jag use the Merc 722.6 box? I know the XK8 does.
r129sl said:
Does anyone know how the gear ratios and final drive compare between SL 500 and 928 S4? I know the Porsche used the Merc box, but they were available with lots of different ratio set ups. I have to chip in, too, that my m113-engined SL 500 (306bhp) always seems a lot faster than its stated power output should allow.
SL ratios below (early car, but they are the same ratios as the first four in your car, also the same final drive). Overall gearing in top is as near as makes no difference, the Porsche is nomimally 28.04 mph/1000, the Merc is nominally 28.3 mph/1000 rpm
That's down to the minor difference in tyre profile, as the final drive is practically the same ratio, 2.64:1 Porsche, 2.65:1 Mercedes.
The Merc has a lower bottom, which should help it off the line, but a higher second. Third gear is very close in both cars, and of course both have 1:1 top.
Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 23 April 21:40
Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 23 April 21:42
No idea where the figure of £8-£900 cambelts for a Rover 75 came from but absolutely not the case. There are a number of 75/MGZT specialists who charge typically £500 including water pump (which needs doing at the same time, too many aren't then a few months later it's belts off again to replace a leaking pump...) The secret of successful 75 ownership is either to be a competent mechanic or have the thing cassettes by a garage that really understands how they work. Too many garages treat them as a piece of automotive junk. Find a good one, have it looked after by an enthusiast and you have a winning barge for peanuts.
This debate needs to be taken off the page and onto tarmac.
Here's a 500SL (with cats so only 322bhp, a spot of rust on the O/S wing and a leaky coolant expansion tank) at the top of thread budget.
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2017...
Now we just have to wait until someone produces a 928S4 within budget. Won't be long, I'm sure.
Here's a 500SL (with cats so only 322bhp, a spot of rust on the O/S wing and a leaky coolant expansion tank) at the top of thread budget.
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2017...
Now we just have to wait until someone produces a 928S4 within budget. Won't be long, I'm sure.
Zonergem said:
This debate needs to be taken off the page and onto tarmac.
Here's a 500SL (with cats so only 322bhp, a spot of rust on the O/S wing and a leaky coolant expansion tank) at the top of thread budget.
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2017...
Now we just have to wait until someone produces a 928S4 within budget. Won't be long, I'm sure.
Recent exhaust and distributer is good. The rust isn't so much, and why not show the car with the roof off (dodgy roof... why am I such a cynic!). Here's a 500SL (with cats so only 322bhp, a spot of rust on the O/S wing and a leaky coolant expansion tank) at the top of thread budget.
http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2017...
Now we just have to wait until someone produces a 928S4 within budget. Won't be long, I'm sure.
I must admit that this colour looks completely wrong to me as well - I just don't like the light blue with dark panels. It looks like it has had a scrapper set of bumpers that need a respray to me. Personal preference of course!
Zonergem said:
This debate needs to be taken off the page and onto tarmac.
Now we just have to wait until someone produces a 928S4 within budget. Won't be long, I'm sure.
Regrettably the 928 ship sailed a couple of years ago. The cheapest S4 I can find for sale at the moment doesn't work, and is on at £13.5kNow we just have to wait until someone produces a 928S4 within budget. Won't be long, I'm sure.
http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C861152
Ones which actually proceed and have MOTs and so on seem to be well into the twenties now.
Okay, there is this one at £14.5K but someone's painted it yellow to create a genuinely disturbing contrast with its burgundy interior
http://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C692884
Some colours work a treat with Porsche burgundy interiors (as with my own), but that yellow seriously ain't one of them
I actually rather like that blue 129, but then blue is probably my favourite car colour, I've had loads of them, dark and light. Saw Zonergem's in the Big Shed the other week and that looks lovely too.
Edited by Lowtimer on Sunday 23 April 22:09
CharlesdeGaulle said:
A PH-er showed me a link to this car at his local auction house:
http://www.mathewsons.co.uk/vehicle-auction-catalo...
I have no need for it, haven't driven it, haven't in fact even seen it. I have nowhere to park it, and sold the SEC recently because I really do have to down-size. The helpful PH-er that viewed it advised me not to bid. I go overseas on Monday until Saturday so timings aren't great, and it will be a red rag to the domestic bull. Crazy to consider a 44 year old car on a whim, obviously. Equally obviously, I've bought it.
Below estimate, but a little above thread max. It isn't without issues, and it would undoubtedly have been sent to auction for a reason, but I've long hankered after one of these and now I can tick the box. Let's hope it isn't a financially ruinous box.
Wowzer - I love that!http://www.mathewsons.co.uk/vehicle-auction-catalo...
I have no need for it, haven't driven it, haven't in fact even seen it. I have nowhere to park it, and sold the SEC recently because I really do have to down-size. The helpful PH-er that viewed it advised me not to bid. I go overseas on Monday until Saturday so timings aren't great, and it will be a red rag to the domestic bull. Crazy to consider a 44 year old car on a whim, obviously. Equally obviously, I've bought it.
Below estimate, but a little above thread max. It isn't without issues, and it would undoubtedly have been sent to auction for a reason, but I've long hankered after one of these and now I can tick the box. Let's hope it isn't a financially ruinous box.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff