Revised MG Rover range...

[D87 SMW]

To be honest, I think MG Rover have fluffed up their range with their new facelifted versions. The revised 25/ZR and 45/ZS are yet to come, but going by the new 75(T)/ZT(T) it isn't looking good.
The Rover 75 V8 for example, is a further modification to the already revised range, and it is simply awful IMO.

It would be good to hear your views.

Old or New?

:banghead: :o :rolleyes:

[Austin-Rover]

Its quite normal for a car to have a facelift after a few years, and i think the results on the 75/ZT are quite nice, problem is theres not really much you can do to a very retro styled car - puting a new front on it would be quite hard without it looking a bit unbalanced, but i think it looks quite nice - and the V8 is lovely :)

Personally its a bit unfair to judge them solely on the facelifted 75. You must remember Rover have very little cash to play with, but they have done very well launching so many new models - even if they are only facelifts or variations on a theme. (Perhaps the Rover 200/25 is the new Austin/Morris 1100, with so many badge-engineered and facelifted versions?) To have developed so many new models with what little resources they have deserves alot of praise. So perhaps waiting for the new 45 and 25 would be wise before saying their future "doesnt look good" I have some faith yet...

Personally, from what i hear about the new 45/25, i hope they do as well as they have done with the new 75.

[Simon]

I think the new models look good, just as classy and I'd be proud to be seen in any of them except for the CityRover which I think is a poor design and is, frankly, crude. I'm dismayed by the penny pinching however. Where have the Rover 25's grab handles gone for example? Mrs. H. is thinking seriously about a Streetwise diesel to replace her 206 later on this year although not with that funny rear seat (a proper one is an option) and an electric sunroof (also now an option).

Some of the new colours are lovely especially in the "Signature" range, However, who was responsible for X-Power Grey? Yukky boring metallic gunmetal left over from the 1980's!

[Alan the Vanner]

Having already driven several of them, I would like to say that they are not bad. I reckon though, that the 25/Streetwise/ZR could do with a little design modernising, but they are a good laugh to drive.
It's funny what RDGelder said about the 1100. All I think of when I look at them is the Allegro, must be the shape I suppose.
I drove a ZR 160 this afternoon, as it happens. Boy did that have some poke?!:eek:

[MGTURBOM]

I think MGR facelifts work quite well along with X-Power Grey which isn't at all boring.

[matthewsemple]

I saw a 75 with the new front for the first time today (apart from pictures) It looked very good surrounded by hundreds of twin-headlamp 75s that my local MG Rover dealer still has to sell.

A difficult situation for the dealer. They have loads of the old model which they will have to discount whilst the new model has had a mixed reaction so that may not sell as well.

Even before this car arrived there was a massive billboard hanging next to the forecourt with a picture of the new 2004 Rover 75.

[matthewsemple]

New MG ZS is pictured in Auto Express this week. They look like proper photos and not the usual computer generated nonsense - but I may be wrong.

Unfortunately the picture of the interior is from the current model with a comment underneath that reads something like "They'll need to do something about this" :laugh:

[E_T_V]

yes the ones from the front look ok but the rear shots are far from flattering

[matthewsemple]

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/picture_library/dir_28/car_portal_pic_14437.jpg?2410

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/picture_library/dir_28/car_portal_pic_14438.jpg?6294

Power to the people! The breath-taking XPower SV supercar is what every MG Rover enthusiast lusts after - but now the muscle of the flagship model has filtered down to the ZS.

These are the first official pictures of the facelifted version, which will make its public debut at next month's British Motor Show and breathe new life into MG's Subaru Impreza pretender. What's more, not only have we got a picture of the revised front end, we also have a world exclusive peek at the rear.

Regular Auto Express readers will be familiar with the new design, because we spied how the revised ZS would look back in issue 787. And although the fresh headlamp arrangement has already been showcased on the revised Rover 45 - as featured in last week's magazine - it's the sportier MG that will be causing the shockwaves with styling cues from the mighty SV.

The ZS 180 version shown here has a fresh grille and front bumper, while its aggressive nose is continued in the profile, with longer wheelarches and SV-style vents on the front wings. Striking 17-inch alloy wheels add to the sporty look, while the rear of the four-door has been given a new smooth-finish bootlid with a subtle spoiler and a racy chrome-tipped exhaust. Most of this beefy bodykit is only standard on the high-performance 2.5-litre V6 180, but those who buy the less potent versions of the ZS can specify the extra trim as an option.

The main reason for the wheelarch extensions is that engineers had to accommodate the car's wider track. Exact suspension details have yet to be revealed, but the increased stability provided by the modifications to the chassis should improve the MG's already impressive handling. Inside, the ZS will receive a much needed makeover. Criticism of the current model's dark plastics and dated ergonomics should be answered with the addition of a redesigned facia and soft-touch trim.

One key piece of switchgear that will definitely have to go is the existing column stalk - which is still supplied by Honda. The dated part is no longer in production, so MG Rover will have to come up with its own design. Sportier dials will also be fitted, while rotary air vents and new air-conditioning should add a classy finish.

But the bad news is that prices are set to rise. An entry-level ZS will cost £11,295 - an increase of £255 - with flagship cars at £17,300, which is £510 more than at present.

[matthewsemple]

Check it out

[Quality]

Rover 75 V8? As long as it's a 3.9 litre or greater Ex-Buick V8 then :D :cool:

[D87 SMW]

Originally posted by matthewsemple
Check it out

Sweet Jesus of Nazereth!!! :eek:

:giveup: :violin:

[Rich]

Originally posted by matthewsemple


One key piece of switchgear that will definitely have to go is the existing column stalk - which is still supplied by Honda. The dated part is no longer in production, so MG Rover will have to come up with its own design.

Who knows, maybe they will dig out the Maestro and Montego style stalks for them?:laugh:

Rich

[Austin-Rover]

i believe those Honda stalks have been consigned to hitory in the faclifts, the 75 style ones replace them i think.

Interestingly, i noticed the other day that the Austin FX4 taxi (not the 'new' London cab, LTI) uses very early Maestro stalks and a later style Maestro intrument pack.

[matthewsemple]

Originally posted by Rich
Who knows, maybe they will dig out the Maestro and Montego style stalks for them?:laugh:
Rich

When the MGF was launched it was criticised for not having electric mirrors because they used Rover Metro/100 mirrors which had manual adjustors.

Then the MGF 2000 was launched and guess what? The electric mirror joystick was a 15-year old item pinched from the Maestro/Montego.

The Maestro/Montego stalks with their thumbscrews and positive action are amongst the best I have used on any car. They are certainly better than those fiddly Honda items (which were also used on the Rover 100, 200, 400, 25, 45, MG ZR, ZS, F and I guess MG TF)

The Rover 75 ones are quite good though and are probably more likely to end up in the new MG ZS.

[D87 SMW]

Originally posted by matthewsemple
The Rover 75 ones are quite good though and are probably more likely to end up in the new MG ZS.

They confuse me. The indicator stalk shows a "lights" symbol, and it looks like you have to turn the end to work them, as per the wiper stalk.

Wrong.

It doesn't turn. It doesn't work the lights. There is an "Astra" style switch to the right of the steering wheel, at the bottom of the dashboard. Such a stupid place to have them.

So, I still think the later Maestro one's are the best of the bunch.

:rolleyes:

[Alan the Vanner]

Originally posted by RDGelder
Interestingly, i noticed the other day that the Austin FX4 taxi (not the 'new' London cab, LTI) uses very early Maestro stalks and a later style Maestro intrument pack.
Didn't the early Land-Rover Discovery's have them as well? I know that the rear light clusters were the same as the Maestro Van's. If only I could find a pair of those Light Guards.
As for the new ZS, I wonder how long it would be before I get to drive one at work? :rolleyes:

[maesty lad]

Has anyone seen pics of the Rover 25 / MG ZR facelift? Auto Express had a story on website but no pics...

:banghead:

[Alan the Vanner]

No, but I will keep a look-out at work.
BTW, I got to drive a ZT V8 today. It took a bit of getting used to seeing the engine with the F**d emblem all over it, but then it is a V8, after all! What grunt?! I was driving at the Compound's 20 MPH speed limit still in first gear! :horror:

[Andy]

I likw all the new range.....except from that dreadful awful street wise :giveup:

[maesty lad]

Pics of the new MG ZS have appeared on the Auto Express website... so in answer to my previous question: :horror:

[maesty lad]

and this is way too boy racer / cheap mod... :banghead:

[D87 SMW]

Pics of the new MG ZS have appeared on the Auto Express website... so in answer to my previous question: :horror:

That's a ZR. It's awful. :nonono:

[maesty lad]

That's a ZR. It's awful. :nonono:

D'oh, of course it is, sorry. Pretty bad anyway, huh? And it seemed to work well on the (real) ZS!

[MGTurbo]

The front end doesnt really work but that back end isnt too bad at all...

[Dave]

You may find poor feedback RE these cars on forums like ours - after all, we're hardly fashionable liking maestros so much! I think MG-R have done a fine job with there market research - silly mods like picnic table spoilers and big air dams seem to be all the rage at the moment.
Personally I quite like the revised range... and im definately not the fashion conscious type!

Dave.

[G51 NAV]

I'll say exactly the same thing I said on the MG Car Company threads at mgcars.org:

It's yet another makover of a tired old design well past its sell-by date which won't make the punters go out and buy it.

I really wish Rover had the cash to develop a really new car. We're almost back to the stage where the company needs to be state-owned again to plough in some much-needed funds so that really new exciting models can be developed, not re-hashes of ageing designs. Of course, that's not going to happen again, and for very good reasons.

Yes, I do like the look of it. But it's still a 3rd-generation Rover 200 underneath. Yes, I'm very 'pro-MG/Rover', or I wouldn't own one of their older cars. And no, I won't be buying it because I cannot and never will be able to afford new cars.

[E_T_V]

There isn't a lot new underneath from my 1992 model, except it has less room in the back and the boot :D

[MGTURBOM]

On the subject of the new revised MGR's, I got the chance of a ride in a MG ZT V8 last weekend. Not only does it look seriously nice, it goes well but above all it sounds amazing.

If I could afford the thirty four grand price tag I would have one tommorrow its a really impressive motor. :cool:

[e692wtt]

On the subject of the new revised MGR's, I got the chance of a ride in a MG ZT V8 last weekend. Not only does it look seriously nice, it goes well but above all it sounds amazing.

If I could afford the thirty four grand price tag I would have one tommorrow its a really impressive motor. :cool:


If money was no object, I would have an MG ZT parked outside the house - not thought much past the 260 to be honest (oops)!

But think of the "D"-word, and imagine my girlfriend's surprise on realising she's just lost £10k in the last 4 years on an Opel Vectra (bought new as an import in late 1999, so V-regd)... got a slap for laughing, and she's an Accountant so is *meant* to realise these things... mind you, I think the market going into freefall caught everyone out... :laugh:

And it's a Saloon with a boot that frankly bears no comparison to the boot on my Monty. With my Monty (Saloon) I could take 2 adults and 2 teenagers (and all the associated rubbish) *and* a wheelchair for a week's holiday, in the boot, no probs. With the Vectra we just managed to get enough luggage in for 2 adults for a long weekend.


And the coil pack failed the week before we were due to go away... on a 1.6 Vectra that's £120 + VAT + fitting + a set of plugs (can you tell she doesn't trust me? probably wisely :laugh: - but on the 1.8, there's 'a conventional coil and HT leads', apparently) with risk of damage to the catalytic converter due to unburnt fuel passing through the misfiring cylinder. Cost for a new coil and leads and plugs for a Montego??? And a Catalytic Converter? Wassat? :confused:

Monty's had misfires in the past. but they were easily, and very cheaply, sorted. Set of plugs less than £6, new HT leads £6, new ignition coil £8???


This is progress? Frankly I don't trust this alleged 'progress' - and I certainly don't trust the 'technology' that occasionally 'tops itself' leaving the car's owner with a big bill when it does so - so am staying put, immune to depreciation and *still* paying less for service parts than owners of more-modern cars. What's £200 for an MoT? About a month's or 6 weeks' HP payments on a new car - and these HP Payments then need to be paid for the rest of the year as well... more fool you guys!!! :p

[e692wtt]

With my Monty (Saloon) I could take 2 adults and 2 teenagers (and all the associated rubbish) *and* a wheelchair for a week's holiday, in the boot, no probs.

Opos, can't see the 'edit post' button, so...

I can fit in all the luggage and detritus for 2 adults and 2 teenagers, and a wheelchair as well, for a 4 night stopover, in Monty's boot, no problems.

*imagines fitting 2 adults, 2 teenagers, luggage for same and a wheelchair as well, all in Monty's boot, with one of the adults driving several hundred miles while in the boot* :laugh:

Thought I'd better make that clear... :confused:

[maesty lad]

:confused:

I like the innovation... what do you guys think?

[MGTurbo]

:confused:

I like the innovation... what do you guys think?

I think the Maestro is better :)

People go on about the ZR being old though, but the Maestro was getting on too when they revised the MG range and people still went out and bought them. To me, the best looking ones were always the colour coded models

The interior is obviously based on the old dash and i cant help but see it every time i look at a picture, it looks like they have plonked some round vents on it and played with the centre console and thats it :rolleyes:

[G51 NAV]

People go on about the ZR being old though, but the Maestro was getting on too when they revised the MG range and people still went out and bought them. To me, the best looking ones were always the colour coded models
The MG Maestro was five years old when the fully-colour-coded 2.0i was previewed, along with the Turbo, at the 1988 Motorshow. In two-litre guise, it was only four years old. As far as I'm aware, the 'bubble-shape' Mk3 Rover 200s first appeared at P-reg (may have even been earlier) which makes them 8 years old now. This is as old as the Maestro was when Rover started to prune-down the range by discontinuing the MG versions, and it limped on for a few more years as the Mk2 Rover 200's poorer cousin in 1.3 and diesel guises.

So yes: take off the fancy new clothes and I think the 8-year-old ZR/25/200 is getting very long in the tooth for a car without an obvious replacement on the horizon.

[D87 SMW]

The MG Maestro was five years old when the fully-colour-coded 2.0i was previewed, along with the Turbo, at the 1988 Motorshow. In two-litre guise, it was only four years old. As far as I'm aware, the 'bubble-shape' Mk3 Rover 200s first appeared at P-reg (may have even been earlier) which makes them 8 years old now. This is as old as the Maestro was when Rover started to prune-down the range by discontinuing the MG versions, and it limped on for a few more years as the Mk2 Rover 200's poorer cousin in 1.3 and diesel guises.

So yes: take off the fancy new clothes and I think the 8-year-old ZR/25/200 is getting very long in the tooth for a car without an obvious replacement on the horizon.

I agree fully with G51 NAV on this subject, and as for the Rover 200, the "rounder" version was introduced on N plate. (I'm sure an M reg could be found, as I have seen a G reg 200 of the kind E_T_V has.)

[Austin-Rover]

....(I'm sure an M reg could be found, as I have seen a G reg 200 of the kind E_T_V has.)

G registration (89/90) was the year the Mk II Rover 200 replaced the Mk I 200. There was a peridod in this year when the two models were sold at the same time - side by side, and it was possible to choose between a Mk I or a Mk II. The Red Mk I Vitesse we owned in the mid 90's was one of the very last Mk I's produced...

[Beaker]

Yeah I see plenty of G reg Rover 200 Mk2's around, they certainly last well and don't rust quite as much as Maestros. More room than the bubble shape as well.