MG ZR 160's (or alternatives)

Stormster

Stormster

Stormster

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
4,671
Location
Stoke-on-Trent
Any good for £2500 for an 03 reg kinda car in good shape?

Any good alternatives for the same money which are equal in terms of pace/handling, good on fuel and significantly better without being a barge? Or indeed much bigger than the ZR? And won't feel too unsettled around a country road? lol :)
 
Last edited:
I'll get in before than anti-MG crew :p

I've driven my flatmate's ZR120 and was seriously impressed. If you forget about the HG issues, they're quite a capable car. Good handling with the lightweight K series up front, the 160 also benefits from the bigger brakes (which I have fitted to my car and work very well).

The K is very good on fuel too! I reckon you'll be pleasantly suprised :)
 
There's not that many pocket rockets at this price, the insurance on the 160 will be killer if you're young but for the money there's not a lot better than the MG in terms of value for money.
 
Last edited:
I'm not particularly young so insurance isn't a problem but if they're seriously nasty cars as some folk on here make out then I'd avoid if there's a better alternative.

I guess there are Xsara VTS's but much of the same I'd imagine lol, prefer the looks of the MG personally :) I know of the HGF issues but is there much else to look for?
 
Rust in the boot region can be a problem I believe. They are not nasty cars at all, the trim is the only shoddy aspect of the car, the prices have fallen so sharply that they are quite good value. It may not be as good as the clio 172 or Fiesta ST but it is way cheaper and is still a fun little car
 
People love to hate the MG/Rover brand just because of the badge. You'll find that most of the people who slate them have never driven an MGR.

Don't think there's anything else to watch out for apart from HGF. Perhaps rattling interiors and what not, but what do you expect from a £2000 car?
 
i used to have a rover coupe vvc which had a almost exactly the same engine apart from the 160 has a few tweaks (i took the throttle body off a 160 to put on my vvc to improve it and added a few mods and probaby put out around 150 or so...) and thought it was a cracking engine...(as did lotus ;) ) and is/was fairly widely used in lightweight kit car type cars due to it being quite lightweight....Loves to rev

My coupe unfortunately started to suffer from the dreaded hgf just before i got rid but if you can find one that has already had it done (properly i.e. uprated gasket etc!!!) then they are decent little cars, as previously mentioned brilliant economy for the power, i used to frequently get 38mpg+ on a long journey and that wasn't sticking to nsl...
 
Don't want a 106 GTI or a Saxo VTS. I'm 27, they're too boy racery and all the kids around here have them I'm afraid.

The MG's sound pretty good then all in all. Like you say, can't expect much for a 2000 quid motor, but the fact they're generally worth the money and you can get a newish reg'd plate as well is a little bonus methinks :)

Are parts cheap and still plentiful?
 
GlasgowTitan said:
Nevermind I was thinking oof the ZS not ZR, but how about the ZS instead of the ZR with the same argument?
Click to expand...

Driven a ZS120, damn lovely cars. Basically the same as my 400 bar a few interior changes, and can't fault it for sure-footed handling etc.

For reference, I prefer the way my 400 (and thus a ZS, handles pretty much the same) handles to a ZR, I'd drive both.

As for the K engine, very much a discussion topic :p

I loved mine, but HGF can be a concern. If you're handy with a spanner you can change a HG on the car within a day, so not a worry for some.

Edit: A ZS is a nice place to be, comfy seats :D If you're after cheap thrills, look out for a 1.8L Rover 45 or a 2.0L Rover 400, both are soooo cheap, just don't look as good and you can get a top spec for silly money. Mine's a V plate top spec and was only £750, awesome for the money.
 
for £2500 you can pick up a tidy ZS180 which will be

A) Faster
B) Handle better
C) More smiles per miles fo sho!!
D) You get a lovely, burbly, torqey V6 which sounds freakin awesome :D

However, if fuel is a concern...look elsewhere lol.
 
ZS180 if insurance isn't a problem or running costs.

A 160 is a good car for the money, the MK2 is a lower insurance group though ;).
 
I looked at some of these but found it hard to find a tidy example. They were either ragged to death or had been in an accident or two. The only one I found that was ok was bright vomit yellow and over priced.

I also looked at a Proton Satria GTi and Corsa 1.8 but settled on a ford puma. I didn't want a citroen either, I had owned one previously.. never again. If you can find a tidy example for that money go for it!
 
Stormster said:
I guess there are Xsara VTS's but much of the same I'd imagine lol
Click to expand...

indeed. 2.5k gets you a minter, 03-04 plate with low mileage. its finding one though as they are quite rare and seem to be snapped up.

legendary XU lump up front, it doesn't 'do' rust and very fun once you mastered the handling.

would be a better buy yes, but the MG edges it in looks, even in facelift form (2.5).
 
do not pay 2.5k for a xsara even if it is a minter. You can get mint ph3 306 gti's at this price range, a much better looking car. The point of the xsara is that its a cheaper option to a 6, just looks butt ugly. I.e. circa 1k, not 2.5.
 
Nathan said:
do not pay 2.5k for a xsara even if it is a minter. You can get mint ph3 306 gti's at this price range, a much better looking car. The point of the xsara is that its a cheaper option to a 6, just looks butt ugly. I.e. circa 1k, not 2.5.
Click to expand...

o rly :p

id rather have a 4 year younger VTS with the stronger 5 speed gearbox. better spec to :)

:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom