Hello all,
Has anyone got experience of either of the above cars?
They both seem to be good value used.
I'm interested in getting one as a second car to replace my 106.
Any convertible would do, but it must be cheap!
|
We had a a 216 coupe which was an excellent car. Engines fitted in these and the cabriolets were the K series 1.4 and 1.8, some other Rover 2.0 unit and the Honda 1.6
The 220 Turbo is best avoided since many have been thrashed to death - they are extremely fast - and the chassis really couldn't handle the power, too much torque steer maninly.
|
|
|
Hi,
I'm on my second 220 turbo coupe (fist was written off, nothing to do with it being fast, it was stationary with handbrake on at the time!) and I really like them.
Big Cat is absolutely correct - lots have been thrashed, modified and generally Gary'ed up. Avoid them. But there are still a good number out there which will serve you well. They are (I hate to admit) extremely cheap now and you get a lot of car for the money.
The most reliable is the _HONDA_ powered 1.6, which is the ones with the old-style interior, before about 1996. After that they switched to Rover engines. Not that the Rover engines are bad, but the Honda ones are really excellent.
I'd go for either the Honda 1.6 or the 220 Turbo. Normally aspirated 220 is a bit of a waste of time - hardly any quicker than the 216 and not as reliable.
On the 220s, watch out for oil leaking from the head/block join below the distributor cap. They ALL do this (unless fixed with a Klinger head gasket, from Rover) and it doesn't _necessarily_ become terminal - my old one had done 105k on its first head gasket and it was showing no signs of trouble. But if it's peeing out (as my new one did at 60k), it'll need a new head gasket.
The oil change interval on the turbos is 6,000 miles - but this isn't made very clear in the service book and lots of people do it at 12k like all the other models. Make sure it's been done at 6k because you don't want turbo trouble. (And if it's been looked after, you won't have any.)
Like any other car there's other stuff to watch out for, but that's the main one.
Not everyone likes them (name a car where that doesn't apply) but I wouldn't have bought a second one if I wasn't impressed.
Hope that helps!
-Mark
|
Normally aspirated 220 is a bit of a waste of time - hardly any quicker than the 216 and not as reliable.
I drove an M plate 420 GSi four door for three years. (Run out 'chrome grille' model of the original design rather than the horrid design that became the 45/ZS)
At the same time in my life, I also used to drive a friend's 216 GTI coupe.
Although the latter had a terrific step in the power band (WALLOP) that was fun when you were in the right mood, as were the stratospheric engine revs, it was a pain in the butt in normal driving. At low and medium revs, the car had the power of a slug. In terms of outright accelaration through the gears, the two cars were absolutely identical, but give me that nice, torquey, (100% reliable for me) T series any day. My 420 GSi also used less fuel than the 216 GTI on any given journey that we both did.
BTW, as I have posted here before, Mark is right on one thing: All T series probably do eventually leak oil from the head gasket down the front of the cylinder block. My 420 did, and so did my father's K plate 820.
|
"Normally aspirated 220 is a bit of a waste of time"
Years ago, my mother had an M reg 420SLi and I recall humiliating some Wayne/Duane/Gary in a BMW 325i who wanted to have a go up the A15 out of Peterborough. I was surprised how easy it was to leave him behind. I suppose he told his girlfriend that he'd been sold some duff fuel....
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't driven the 216 or 220 Turbo but the normally aspirated 220 that I used to own seemed pretty fast to me. Apart from an engine management problem that afflicted it for a short while and the necessity to replace the water pump it was a paragon of reliability needing only regular servicing replacements. It was still on the original clutch when I eventually sold it with 135,000 miles on the clock - and I didn't drive it particularly gently either.
|
|
|
|
I have only seen Coupe/model in 1.6/2.0 /or turbo versions. would look at service history before anything else. ie full service hist/speaks for itself. well looked after. I havent owned either but as far as I am aware both need this history as reports of badly looked after cars can cost a fortune. Would if you want one look at tailgate/boot for surface rust. isnt so bad as it can be rectified. Also check out door sills they also suffer rust though not serious and only at base of doors. oil/filter/cambelt change done at correct times.if not would avoid.
--
Was mech1
|
Nobody's mentioned the VVC yet!
In 96 they revised the range - gave it the new bubble shape Rover 200 interior, and changed the engines:
upto 96 there was a Honda 1.6, Rover 2.0, Rover 2.0T
after 96 it was Rover 1.6 and Rover 1.8vvc.
Whilst the VVC is not as quick as the turbo (145bhp as opposed to 200bhp) I have been told it is more useable in real terms on the road, and a better drive.
If you do go for a vvc engined car make sure it has a full Rover sh, vvc mechanism needs to be looked after properly. Advantage is you get a much nicer interior and you can find them on S plates if you're very lucky. Great car. Check the T-bar roof doesn't leak and that the bags for the glass roof pieces are there.
|
Thanks for all your replies.
The car I have my eye on is a '96N Rover 216 Coupe.
Looks immaculate in silver.
97k.
Being sold by a local garage who have a good reputation for after sales.They told me that they sold it 4 years ago and have serviced it since.
Their asking #2450 for it.
What do you think guys?
|
I just bought a 216 Coupe N reg 96, With the Honda engine and 97K also!! it has a full Service history and is the best car i have ever driven im loving every second of it.
And i only payed £1300 for it, so £2450 seems a little high!
|
|
|
£2450 is WAY over the odds. Glass's puts that at £800-£1200 tops trade value, so a whopping 100% mark up if they paid top book for it, which I can guarantee they didn't. You shouldn't pay a penny over £1500 for one of that age.
No Dosh - Backroom Moderator
mailto:moderators@honestjohn.co.uk
|
Thanks all,
As it turns out the Rover was sold before I got back to the garage.
Problem solved!!
|
|
As the EGG advert says; there's one born every minute.
|
|
|
|
|
|
