You don't say how old your car is. I think the very last ones (with the dubious facelift) had a low water level warning indicator fitted. There is a retro fit available. Well worth investigating.
You bought the better engine - I wouldn't give a sucked toffee for a 1.8
|
You don't say how old your car is. I think the very last ones (with the dubious facelift) had a low water level warning indicator fitted. There is a retro fit available. Well worth investigating. You bought the better engine - I wouldn't give a sucked toffee for a 1.8My answer to you is youve actually never owned the 1.8 vvc engine then. your just guessing! or cannot afford the 1.8 vvc 160. Weve all heard about the head gasket failures in all the k series engines not just the 1.8s. I ve got a 2004 mg zr 160 vvc and its the quickest car ive ever owned. It doesnt spill a drop of anything, it has fsh and 53k. I get it serviced every 8k with coollant and oil changes. Ive hads timing belt and vvc, waterpump done 3 k ago. The car is mint and i would bet you anything right now that it will do 100,000 miles easily. Put your money where your mouth is. The 1.8i 160vvc goes like a rocket 0-60 in 6 seconds dead ( yes ive timed it). Its got a scorpion racing exhaust on it and its a madman. Aslong as i look after it which i do, its my baby why would it fail? it wouldnt. you dont know what your on about. Oh yes and its 2011 now the car is 7 n half years old and looks like its brand new. lets bet XILENO.
Edited by andi 160 vvc on 07/09/2011 at 03:18
|
|
|
|
As someone who worked for an MG dealer I can say with certainty that the MGs to avoid are those made later on in production when cost cutting came in and quality nosedived.
The earlier ZRs are indeed nice cars and provided they are well cared for, shouldnt pose many problems.
A customer of mine used to run MGs on his fleet and still has a couple of ZRs running, both 1.4's.
One has a serious misfire and rusting tailgate and the other is a serious rust bucket as both rear wings, arches, the tailgate and roof are all bubbling away nicely. The clutch is stupidly heavy and the interior is falling apart. Both have only done app 30k a piece.
These however are 54 plate cars with that horrible restyle they did.
I have never seen any such problems with the earlier rounded style versions and would buy one myself without hesitation.
|
Congratulations on the purchase!
I've got a TF with the supposedly dodgy 1.8 K Series as my main daily runabout and I have to say I have nothing but praise for the car. It handles beautifully, the engine pulls from less than 2K right round to the red line, and so far, nothing has gone wrong. Superb motor and I would most certainly buy it again.
I hope your ZR proves to be just as good!
Blue
|
Mine is an 04-reg pre-facelift.
Whilst i was looking at it there was a facelifted version with a £1k heavier price tag, i noticed there was a plastic mounting around the tow hook, what was the point of it? possibly to do with cost cutting then.
--
Its not what you drive, its how you drive it! :-)
|
I too was bitten by the MG Z series bug 2 months ago after never before considering a MG or Rover.
I bought a MG ZT 180+ auto on a '52'.
After running a new shape Passat TDI for 2 years it's a bit barn door engineering but I dont care..
I'm utterly hooked..
|
Mmmm... the ZT, there's a car that I could also consider buying, lovely looking motors.
Blue
|
Phew - not soo many anti MGR/K-series know-alls here then!
Well, my ZT-T pre-facelift still, in my humble opinion, still looks the biz in its solar red. It goes perfectly well and it's "only" got the 120 non-turbo 1.8, yes, 1.8 K-series engine.
OK, the rest to 60 isn't as fast as many, but does that really matter? My daily journey is aobut 26 miles each way, mostly along a dual carriageway. Once on the go, it, er, well let's just say that it indicates 90+ pdq.
Its coming up to 45,000 miles, had regular MG-R/X-Part servicing along with an oil and filter change at 5k intervals. People ask me "why do that?" and I tell them that I read HJ!
I hate tempting providence, but so far, the temperature gauge has never ventured above normal, and the coolant level rarely dips.
I do remember being very impressed with the acceleration of a ZR 1.4 loan car whilst mine was in for a service once. You certainly don't get that turn of speed in my big MG, but that's hardly suprising!
So, enjoy. It's a free world.
|
|
I went from a Passat to a ZT a few years ago. Never looked back Passat absolute dirge, ZT, fantastic, reliable car, that was a pleasure to drive. Only changed due to growing family.
|
|
Its a shame that MGRover weren't able to capitalise on your experience.
|
A client of ours bought an 03 reg ZS new, with the 180 bhp V6 in it. He asked me to drive it as "he wanted my opinion" whatever that was worth. Anyway, to cut a long story short, I would rate it as one of the best 5 handling cars I've ever driven. Stuck like poo to a blanket, got its power down beautifully, had lots of feel through the steering, and you could play with the balance on the throttle, feeling the tail edging out exactly as commanded. Just as good as a Peugeot 306, and better than a Focus IMHO. Spent about half an hour around the outer roads of Milton Keynes just squirting it between the roundabouts, and enjoying the lovely balance around the roundabouts, and then headed out of town to stretch its legs a little. I genuinely can only think of a handful of other cars that stuck such a grin on my face and kept it there
It was decently quick, made a terrific noise, and combined with the corking chassis I remember thinking it would be a brilliant car to cover a long A and B-road journey in, just for its ground covering ability and the way it genuinely entertained.
Downsides? 20 mpg and the most naff interior it has ever been my misfortune to witness. 90's Honda with a £20 makeover. Decently screwed together though.
I last saw him a year ago and the car had racked up 20,000 miles. Nothing had broken, fallen off or ceased functioning.
Although I don't dispute that MG/Rover/Leyland made some dire carp over the years, there have been moments of brilliance. This is one. I wonder if our society wasn't so image obsessed ("Why test drive it - it's a tarted up old Honda. Get me the number of the VW dealer"), we'd see a few more on the roads.
I was wondering if I'd gone mad enjoying it this much, but felt quite vindicated when I read that Tiff Needell had called it "the best front wheel drive car I've ever driven". Not that I'd compare myself to Tiff Needell in any way in terms of driving skill, but I do like to think I know a good (or bad) handling car when I drive one.
If I could live with 20mpg, I'd very seriously consider one.
Cheers
DP
--
04 Grand Scenic 1.9 dCi Dynamique
00 Mondeo 1.8TD LX
|
Id second the ZS comments, the V6 is a real beastie on a budget.
My service dept manager had a ZS 120 1.8 and we used it on occasion for colection and delivery as run around. You can genuinely drive the wheels off those cars because they are so much lighter than modern stuff which tend to feel very stable but somewhat hefty.
The ZS on the otherhand is both chuckable and one of those cars that is so rewarding when you push on. Its old-school but thats really the point - the best hot hatches were from the 80's and early 90's and if you liked them, cars like the ZS and ZR can take you back to that time when a car the size of an Escort didnt need 250 bhp to make any progress down the road.
|
Just done a 300+ mile round trip in my ZR, was very impressed with it's performance when cruising on the M4 at around 70mph, if a bit boomy due to the lack sound insulation (but that what it's all about :-))
I managed to return just over 40 mpg which is about right.
One thing that spoils the drive is the deep clutch it has compared to other cars i've driven, I find myself having to rev it a bit when i pull away from standstill. But that's something to get used to.
--
Its not what you drive, its how you drive it! :-)
|
One thing that spoils the drive is the deep clutch it has compared to other cars i've driven...
You can easily adjust the biting point and pedal travel, if that would make any difference.
|
|
2002 ZT 190bph V6.....one of the best cars I've ever owned.
Actually saw it in a dodgy dealers last year (while looking for a runaround for the MiL), and sorry to say it looked a bit rough round the edges. The latest owner had obviously canned it and it was covered in scratches and damaged alloys. I felt like buying it back and putting it back to the condition it was in when I sold it..
|
Phew - not soo many anti MGR/K-series know-alls here then! Well, my ZT-T pre-facelift still, in my humble opinion, still looks the biz in its solar red. It goes perfectly well and it's "only" got the 120 non-turbo 1.8, yes, 1.8 K-series engine. OK, the rest to 60 isn't as fast as many, but does that really matter? My daily journey is aobut 26 miles each way, mostly along a dual carriageway. Once on the go, it, er, well let's just say that it indicates 90+ pdq. Its coming up to 45,000 miles, had regular MG-R/X-Part servicing along with an oil and filter change at 5k intervals. People ask me "why do that?" and I tell them that I read HJ! I hate tempting providence, but so far, the temperature gauge has never ventured above normal, and the coolant level rarely dips. I do remember being very impressed with the acceleration of a ZR 1.4 loan car whilst mine was in for a service once. You certainly don't get that turn of speed in my big MG, but that's hardly suprising! So, enjoy. It's a free world.
test drive the 1.8i 160 vvc then buddy and youll wet yourself.
|
|
|
