Opinions on choice of car

Zube

Mailman wrote: »

sorry you don't know these cars.

Rover did indeed kit these cars out well, with a pipe rack, hatstand, and a clever holder for your walking stick in the drivers door. It's a pity the cruise control only works up to 40 mph, but few of them are ever driven that fast anyhow. Another drawback is that the radio only picks up Terry Wogan, for some reason.

Mailman

Zube wrote: »

Rover did indeed kit these cars out well, with a pipe rack, hatstand, and a clever holder for your walking stick in the drivers door. It's a pity the cruise control only works up to 40 mph, but few of them are ever driven that fast anyhow. Another drawback is that the radio only picks up Terry Wogan, for some reason.

It's a pity that Rover closed down. Now the only cars in the market are ones that aspire to be VW Passat clones or Toyota Avensis knock-offs. Hell, some of them even advertise themselves as more German than the Germans.
The day MG-Rover shut down was a bad day for the motor industry.

Zube

I don't agree, I think MG-Rover, Rover, BL, British Leyland or whatever are no loss. What was the last good car they made? The original Mini?

The Rover 75 seemed to be some sort of confused effort to put out a small executive car which would be guaranteed not to compete with BMWs 3 series, since BMW owned Rover at the time. So it couldn't be sporty, or handle well, or be modern. Instead it is comfy and loaded with kit. It's the car equivalent of those fluffy zip-on slipper things you see old folks wearing.

Mailman

Zube wrote: »

I don't agree, I think MG-Rover, Rover, BL, British Leyland or whatever are no loss. What was the last good car they made? The original Mini?

The Rover 75 seemed to be some sort of confused effort to put out a small executive car which would be guaranteed not to compete with BMWs 3 series, since BMW owned Rover at the time. So it couldn't be sporty, or handle well, or be modern. Instead it is comfy and loaded with kit. It's the car equivalent of those fluffy zip-on slipper things you see old folks wearing.

I love comments like this. This sort of view allowed me to purchase a stacked luxury car for less than super-mini money.

Eoin

Zube wrote: »

The Rover 75 seemed to be some sort of confused effort to put out a small executive car which would be guaranteed not to compete with BMWs 3 series, since BMW owned Rover at the time.

Is it that different to VAG having lots of cars in the same class?

Zube wrote: »

So it couldn't be sporty, or handle well, or be modern. Instead it is comfy and loaded with kit.

Some people want a comfy car and don't care if it's sporty or not.

I can completely understand why someone would want this interior ahead of a 3 series one:

tw0nk

Ive never driven a 75 but Ive been a passenger in one from Dublin to Cork and I have to say its a gorgeous comfortable car. Im changing car next month and I looked at the 75 more than once as an option but theres this niggling doubt in the back of my mind not to get one for reliability/parts reasons. My thoughts could be completely unfounded but I cant stop thinking it. For that reason Im leaning towards the new model s40 now, the 1.8 petrol version.

Dirty_Diesel

faceman wrote: »

The chap is limited to these 2 choices. (Bloody foreigners! )

02 Seat Cordova - 60k (Miles)
01 Rover 75 connoisseur - 80k (Miles)

Which would you go for?

Definately the Seat, due to VAG build quality. I couldn't think of a worse comparison tbh

colm_mcm wrote: »

How does a blown head gasket on a €50 Rover 820 make a Rover 75 a bad buy?

Because Rover still used plastic dowels to locate the head in the block, and also had a water pump that consisted on a plastic impellor in a steel shaft that expanded and stopped spinning!

Although for piece of mind all you need to do is buy a spurious pump from a motor factors (one-piece impellor & shaft) and steel dowels for the head and you will have a trouble free Rover

Mailman

plastic dowels were only used on 1.8K block and upgrading the HG to a LandRover one with metal dowels is the fix for this issue.
Water Pump is not really a major problem on this engnine either; Water leaks are the big big issue due to low coolant capacity and wet liner design.
If you want to avoid these problems buy a V6.

Eoin

Dirty_Diesel wrote: »

Definately the Seat, due to VAG build quality. I couldn't think of a worse comparison tbh

VAG build quality is greatly over-rated.

thats_life

just buy a toyota!

if ya cant...flip a coin on the seat/rover. but you'll probably get a buyer quciker for the seat if you ever decide to sell it in the future....

Esel

Mailman wrote: »

I disagree stongly! Autobox is not a major issue on this car. HGF failure on 1.8, radiator fans and clutch plates on manuals are items to watch for.

Just going by what Honest John says:

"On automatics, a piston cracks and a 3rd to 4th gear problem shows up, then gradually spreads as the bits from the damaged piston spread. Reverse goes next. and soon there is no drive at all."

Mailman

esel wrote: »

Just going by what Honest John says:

"On automatics, a piston cracks and a 3rd to 4th gear problem shows up, then gradually spreads as the bits from the damaged piston spread. Reverse goes next. and soon there is no drive at all."

And in the line before he says "some reports" not these Jatco boxes are very troublesome.
The Automatics are not a big issue on the Rover 75.
Look at all the reports of problems in his record for the Ford Focus which is considered a reliable car; if it is a common car that has been on the market for the last few years HonestJohn will have added in anything he has found in the intervening period.
And the autobox is not something you'd worry about anyhow, if an autobox is shifting smoothly up and down during the test drive then it will be OK. If it isn't you walk away there an then. It isn't something that the previous owner can disguise and will suddenly blow 1000 miles down the line.

Esel

Mailman wrote: »

... if an autobox is shifting smoothly up and down during the test drive then it will be OK....It isn't something that ....will suddenly blow 1000 miles down the line.

Don't know how you can say that with confidence. Any problem can happen with any car '1000 miles down the line'. I like autos, btw.

Mailman

esel wrote: »

Don't know how you can say that with confidence. Any problem can happen with any car '1000 miles down the line'. I like autos, btw.

It's a fairer comment than saying the autoboxes in Rover 75s are troublesome.

Esel

Mailman wrote: »

It's a fairer comment than saying the autoboxes in Rover 75s are troublesome.

Jeez. Heres the relevant section from Honest John. There are two separate statements.

Honest John wrote:

Some problems emerging with 5-speed autobox on diesels: clutch packs breaking up after 3-4 years.

On automatics, a piston cracks and a 3rd to 4th gear problem shows up, then gradually spreads as the bits from the damaged piston spread. Reverse goes next. and soon there is no drive at all.

So, he says that the clutch pack on the diesel autobox breaks up after 3-4 years. He then goes on to make a separate statement about the Jatco automatics developing a cracked piston.

Mailman

esel wrote: »

Jeez. Heres the relevant section from Honest John. There are two separate statements.



So, he says that the clutch pack on the diesel autobox breaks up after 3-4 years. He then goes on to make a separate statement about the Jatco automatics developing a cracked piston.

And I direct you back to my post about his comments on the Ford Focus. If anyone read them they'd be afraid to buy a Focus which is acknowledged to be a reliable car. I'm not going to post all the reports he has made of problems with the Focus because it is just not fair to the car. I certainly wouldn't respond to a thread about somebody considering purchasing a Ford Focus listing all the reported problems and say that on the Ford Focus X,Y or Z has given "major problems" as it is not a fair comment on the car.

Your comment was unfair and I'm calling you on it!

Eoin

I may be wrong, but Honest John seems to list every single problem that has ever happened with a car, but not give an idea to the frequency or likelihood of the problem.