MG ZS, any good?

Third Opinion said:
Ok it is state of the art car that is not basically a Rover 45 with a bodykit produced in 1990. In fact MG company was so good that BMW didn't sell it for a Tenner after ploughing millions into a sinking ship. The K series engine was and still is state of the art despite being introduced in 1998. It did not suffer frequent head gasket failure's although it is well documented..

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rover_K_engine

1.6 engines of the eighties like the FORD CVH only achieved 105bhp in tuned form without head gasket failures.. The later Zetec introduced in the 90's could develop anything from 100BHP to 130bhp.

Are you happier with that?
Click to expand...

Jesus when will you stop being wrong? You clearly have no idea at all what you're on about.

The Rover 45 was not introduced in 1990. It surfaced around 2000.
Even it's predecessor only started production in 1995/1996, the Rover 400.

The K series engine was developed around 1990.

So tell me, as it's not motors, what is your field of expertise? I will gladly refer to a forum of more suitable interest.
 
mattyprice4004 said:
Jesus when will you stop being wrong? You clearly have no idea at all what you're on about.

The Rover 45 was not introduced in 1990. It surfaced around 2000.
Even it's predecessor only started production in 1995/1996, the Rover 400.

The K series engine was developed around 1990.

So tell me, as it's not motors, what is your field of expertise? I will gladly refer to a forum of more suitable interest.
Click to expand...


Fair play I made a typo, 1999 not 1990. I put my hands up to that.

K-series according to wiki was introduced in 1988, I guess would have taken a few years development.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rover_K_engine
 
Brian8bit said:
Nobody said it was. But they're not saying it's the spawn of satan like you're implying either.
Click to expand...


I want to finish on a good note without all the bickering. I put my hands up to the typo and I was wrong, I am man enough to admit that.

The op asked for opinions ok, I owned a Rover 75 diesel and to be honest it was a lovely car to drive. It had the BMW engine which I tuned to around 140bhp from 110BHP. This was 3 years ago and first problem was the main cooling fan went. Replacements were available but around £300 pounds. In fact I took it apart and found it was just gritted up so cleaned it with WD40 and replaced. It worked fine.

Unfortuately the lack of cooling caused the air conditioning compressor to fail. Replacements were quoted to be from £600-£800 pounds. The car was probably only worth 2k. I decided to buy a new car and thought I could chop it in as a P/ex. I was very wrong, most dealers wouldn't take it fall stop or at best would offer me £600 providing the compressor was replaced. In the end I ebayed it for £300.

I do have a bad attitude towards MG/Rover from my own bitter experience. My sister had the MG ZR which her boyfriend bought but a series of failures made them sell it at a major loss.

If you do buy it I hope you enjoy it and you have no problems.
 
Third Opinion said:
The K series engine was and still is state of the art despite being introduced in 1998.
Click to expand...

Ah right, yeah in 1988 they were developing, just you said 1998 here.
Easy typo to make, sorry. It is indeed 1988 according to Wiki so assume you meant that.

And your lucky you didn't have clutch hydraulics issues, the 75 isn't particularly weak but they do fail. As they say, could have been a lot worse! :p
 
Yeah, cheers to many beers.

I think MG cars in the 2000's reminded me of Lancia's in the UK in the 1980's Not in comparison of technology but the way they compare to other cars and the way people feel about them.

I loved Lancia's despite what people thought about them and they did have a few great aspects, especially the Delta Intergrale.

If you are determined to accept they are what they are you will love them. But if you compare them them to cars of the same age you can feel cheated quality wise. Still like the Lancia's you do get quite a lot of car for your £'s.

Would you say that is a more accurate assessment?
 
Compare to the same age of car, and you'll be disappointed, but compare to something of the same money and you won't. :)

Just irritates me when people misquote things, and exaggerate the head gasket problem, nothing personal mate. :p

Out of them all, IMO, the 2.5 V6 or the 2.0 diesels are the best.
Not that I don't like the 1.8 - I just think if you're going to get one of these do it properly as they really are quite fun when pressing on.

If you're like me, you'll find yourself taking the back roads so you can blat around and enjoy the handling, they're really not a motorway car!

I have the 2.0 diesel, the engine is the only thing I've modified - from 99bhp to about 155bhp. Goes like a good'un and it's been very reliable.

My opinion is do it, but if you're after doing a bit of motorways, look at a late Rover 45. Same car, even cheaper, with some comfort.

For example, my mate got a 54 plate Rover 45 for £1800 - the rock solid diesel, with sunroof, climate, heated seats and just 60,000 miles. Absolute stunner too in Copperleaf Red.
 
mattyprice4004 said:
Jesus when will you stop being wrong? You clearly have no idea at all what you're on about.

The Rover 45 was not introduced in 1990. It surfaced around 2000.
Even it's predecessor only started production in 1995/1996, the Rover 400.

The K series engine was developed around 1990.

So tell me, as it's not motors, what is your field of expertise? I will gladly refer to a forum of more suitable interest.
Click to expand...

Just thought id point out that while the Rover 45 indeed surfaced in 1999 it was based on a Honda (the Domani) from 1992, so technically his statement about the MG ZS being based on a car from the early 90's is correct, though not for the reasons he originally stated.
 
So it's ok then. Going to have a look and test drive later. Cambelt is 60k or 5/6 years so it should have been done by now. If not it's £385 for my local garage to do it so more bargaining to be done there. There's also a 1.8 version in the same town for sale for £1750 and that's just has the cambelt and head gasket changed. It's a year older but may give me some extra leverage with the 05 plate 1.6.
 
got a 1.8 recently as a runaround, 2003 plate for £600,, more out of need than choice, within a month unfortunatly the thermostat locked up and the overheated the engine, although it didnt show on the temp gauge, the headgasket went as a result, i managed to get it fixed quite cheap. The coolant circuit is an odd design with the thermostat on the inlet, which from what i've read since could be a major contributor to the headgasket failure. Anyway the engine had managed 77000 miles before the stat failed and lunched the gasket. Otherwise its a very good handling car, really enjoy driving it, suspension wise its the same fundemental design as the civic mb6 and very similar to the integra's i've worked on, so its good handling is no surprise. It is quite uncomfertable over bumpy roads though. Would reccomend it for its handling but be wary of potential problems relating to the cooling system if its a k series engined car.
 
eatcustard said:
Late K series engines had a better head gasket on them.
So should not have the head gasket problems.
Click to expand...


what year did the mg's get them? mine was a 2003 and didnt have the better gasket, i fitted it when the original went though. As i understand it this isnt a cure but the newer gasket does help, much of the problems with the headgasket are a result of the cooling system layout and the stat being on the inlet rather than outlet, which is why on the freelander they eventually moved the thermostat, there has been kits around for ages to move the stat to the water outlet for the elise/exige.
 
dalin80 said:
Lovely engine to drive, complete git to work on.

Still have nightmares about doing all 3 cambelts.
Click to expand...

hehe didn't know that, my old man had one, it was a pretty good car, sold it years ago for dirt cheap, good car for the money really, there quite nippy as well, and there not that heavy, only a tad over 1200kg.
 
Been for a look. Lovely car, black, perfect condition. Unfortunately the cambelts not been done and he will not drop below 2k so i gave him my number and walked. Look's like a crappy 1.4 Fiesta then. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom