Hi, am thinking of getting a 416 but here contrasting stories regarding the engine.
Some say engine is terrible and head gaskets always go othrs say the Honda engine is superb.
How can u tell which engine the car has?
Also any other major probs to look out for?
Thanks in advance
|
IIRC the Honda unit is only fitted to the auto..Good engine though.Rover unit.. check out the coolant header tank for any signs of oil contamination/oil filler cap for mayo.If either spotted could be a sign of H/G failure.Or has had one in the past.If owner honest (most are)they will tell you of any faults.But bear in mind if it needs H/G may cost up to £1600 to fix depending on who does it?
--
Steve
|
|
|
Great cars - the most recent range (i.e. the one common with the Civic, not the Concerto) were exclusively Rover K-series engined (except the auto).
I ran one as a company car between 25,000 and 80,000 miles and would have been happy to do the same mileage again had the servicing not been neglected by my near bankrupt former employer. Having run a company Vectra and a private Pug 306DT in the interim, I now have a Civic 1.5 which is essentially the same car but Honda engined.
The engines are very eager to rev, but with good torque for the engine size. High mileage tends to make them a bit more vocal at the top-end and gruff lower down but if you're in the mood this is quite encouraging. I have never heard of head gaskett problems but as previoud respondants have mentioned, its easy enough to check for.
Build quality is good - being Honda-engineered, the bodywork fit is exceptional for a car of this era and the paint is v. durable too. The interior of the car is dated, but solid enough. The hard plastics tend to exacerbate the odd rattle. I had no issues with comfort in the car but am probably at the younger end of the target audience.
With regard to the driving experience, all the major controls work well. The steering is minimally assisted which takes a bit of getting used to, but rewards with good traction feedback, especially with the optional 15" or 16" alloys. Handling is dated by modern standards but safe, predictable and fun can be had. Motorway driving is acceptable, with reasonable noise levels from the road and wind. The front-mounted radio aerial can cause a bit of audible turbulence, whilst very strong side-winds can initiate a slightly awkward "corkscrew" type rolling sensation. On the right day, though, the car is very stable and rewarding to drive. I'm not particularly proud of the moment I saw an indicated 130mpg on a downhill motorway stretch but the car handled it just fine.
All in all, I'd say that there are cars with better engines, car that handle better or have nicer interiors. For the bargain second hand prices you see these cars on sale for, I'd say you'd struggle to find such a balanced combination of driving dynamics, quality and economy.
|
|
deliberate non-proud mistake. mph, not mpg. empty motorway, young and foolish and know far better these days, by the way.
|
Agree with likerocks's views. Sturdy motors, reliable when looked after, swmbo's 1995 416i is now at 80,000 miles having served 5 years/40,000 miles in our company with very few problems. Rear trailing arm bushes replaced, minor electrical gremlins, new battery, exhaust, front disks/pads. Plenty more advice on this site, eg: www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/?t=24390&m=247928
likerocks - interested how you rate your 1.5 Civic compared to the 416?
cheers,
Ed.
|
Ed,
The car is essentially identical inside and out, the engine is the only difference really.
Compared with the Rover unit, the Honda 1.5VTEC unit compares quite favourably.
Being an all-alloy engine, the car is noticeably less nose-heavy than the Rover. The engine is also quieter under steady driving conditions. This is probably due in part to the fact that its only single cam. The downside of this is that the encouraging cammy rumble of the K series engine is missing when pressing on.
I think its probably more due to the VTEC II engine management than the 100cc displacement difference, but the Civic is noticeably shorter on torque than the 416. Fortunately, this has encouraged me to make more use of the slick gearbox and give more consideration to advanced driving principles, so I don't regard it as a bad thing. Having had a series of TD-engined cars and vans, its good to improve upon this underrated driving skill.
The Honda is not really a car which lends itself to agressive driving (I think the Rover was more stiffly sprung and certainly had bigger wheels and lower profile tyres) but the VTEC engine really comes into its own when given a bootfull of thottle with anything from around 3000rpm showing. There's a noticeable final kick in the power delivery at 5000 rpm and the engine takes on a very sporty note. The 416 was far more linear in its delivery.
Its quite strange how two near-indentical cars can differ so much in their driving character...
|
Had a Rover engined R reg. Really good & smooth but very annoying engine jerkiness on small throttle openings / taking up drive. The only way I could get away from it was by changing it for the Honda engined Auto !!
Good luck, Vinnie
|
|
|
|
