Rover 400 (1995 - 1999)

4
reviewed by Timothy Stevenson on 3 April 2021
5
reviewed by Austin Anorak on 13 October 2017
4
reviewed by Andy 94 on 1 August 2013
4
reviewed by ned zeppelin on 5 February 2013
4
reviewed by yrromman53 on 14 July 2012
3
reviewed by Anonymous on 2 July 2012
3

400 sdi 2,0 5dr

reviewed by yesyes on 8 January 2012
3
Overall rating
3
How it drives
5
Fuel economy
2
Tax/Insurance/Warranty costs
4
Cost of maintenance and repairs
3
How practical it is
3
How you rate the manufacturer
5
Overall reliability

Tough old ugly workhorse, economical and quick

Bought as a cheap old commuter to be driven on rough narrow country lanes, mileage was high, have now added 5000 more miles: diesel engine is a gem, quick responsive and economical, steering exceedingly vague coupled with the worse steering-lock of any car I've ever driven, road holding mediocre with excessive body roll; body has corrosion around windscreen and around hatchback door hinges but is solid otherwise; well appointed inside with useful all electric windows and mirrors, driver's seat adjustable 4 ways but is still unconfortable for me, annoying lights and wipers switches have twisting action, roof and door linings now have aging fabric peeling off; overall the car feels very solid and quite well built, better than the rather flimsy Rover 200 of the same age, probably due to the 400 being based on a Honda model, unfortunately its design is quite ugly, it looks just like a blob really. Ideal car for what I need though, I don't have to worry about potholes, mud and scratching it against hedges and I get 50 miles to the gallon with careful driving, it's spacious enough to carry 4 people and has a big enough boot for large items. When it comes to replacing it, I will consider the newer 45 as it has improved steering, cheaper roadtax, etc, but for me only the diesel engined model is worth considering.

Report as offensive

Write your review

Just reviewed...

3
submitted by A Daramy-Bassey