MG ZT 260 Opinions

But that's not got most of a Mustang under the hood :)

Everything I read says the European V8's just aren't the same. They are probably too refined. Also I think the 540i would probably cost more to run?
 
The "Modular" Ford V8 in the MG is an OHC V8, much like any European V8 - although the one found in the MG has just two valves per cylinder, not four like its European/Japanese equivalents. Later versions of the Modular V8 did come with three- and four-valve heads, however.

It's not your classic cam-in-block Ford/Chevy/Mopar etc V8 found in numerous sixties, seventies, eighties and nineties muscle and sports cars.

Running costs, tricky one. To be honest I wouldn't think there was much in it and spares availability is much greater for the E39. BMW's probably faster as well (if it's a six-speed). Certainly more economical.
 
Last edited:
I have a MG ZT 190+ whilst it is very much a different car from the 260, I would be spending my money on a 540i instead. The interior for a start just feels like a different league of car.

The 260 is lovely though and given the money I would have one myself (along with an LPG conversion!) :)
 
Do 540's even exist in Manual, Can't find any and even the ones I can find are automatics and tend to be older and sporting 100k miles or more for £4k. I also guess if it's not a sport in with have pretty soft suspension. The ZT260 is supposed to be a drivers car and handle really well.
 
Last edited:
You know if your set on a V8 and will consider others take a look at 4.2 Jaguar S Types may all be autos but 4K will almost certainly get you same age and mileage as the MG.

There is even of course The 4.2R for a little more or a couple of years older a full 400 BHP beast , not cheap to run but then I seriouly doubt the MG will be either.
 
Actually fuel aside the ZT has a very reliable very uncomplicated engine and simple suspension. The same cannot be said for the S-Type R.
 
[TW]Fox;22543769 said:
The same cannot be said for the S-Type R.
Click to expand...

Didn't that engine have the revised liners and timing chain tensioner?

Probably still not as reliable as the Mustang lump though like you say.
 
Just buy it
the only downside can be the fuel costs , but if you are prepared for that then their is no downside.
its not even that much thirstier than a focus st with remap
a 3000 mile old engine and gearbox to boot
whats not to like
 
Dr Who said:
Didn't that engine have the revised liners and timing chain tensioner?

Probably still not as reliable as the Mustang lump though like you say.
Click to expand...

It's not the motor on the S-Type R that's the issue. It's all the other stuff.
ZF 6-Speed tranny can be problematic, suspension bushes wear out very quickly (mine's only done 71k miles and all the bushes need doing).
 
I have to agree with some of the comments too, I find the ZT quite tempting. I think it feels more simple and something feels good about it being re-designed for RWD

Im not a fan of the quad exhausts, if it had 2 singles I'd like it more, but overall its a great tempting package for not much money.

I always remember this from these forums ages ago:

Seems they can take more power than the standard easily?
 
The internals are supposedly good for around 400BHP which is exactly what MG were intending. Apparently they had Prodrive rework the 260 to 395BHP which was going to go on sale.
 
Any facelift ZT was subject to project drive, built at an entirely different factory and subject to general poor quality materials and build. The engine will last way beyond the car in this case :)

Jump around some of my previous posts and you'll see I linked to a massive document highlighting the differences and what was what
 
Capt Doufos said:
Any opinions welcome, because I really don't know which way to go car wise!
Click to expand...

My opinion is no, this isn't the type of car you buy because you want a car like that, its the type of car you buy because you want this car (kinda like an RX8). Its basically an improved Rover 75 with a body kit, it costs more and is less reliable than superior contemporaries, just no, unless ofc it is really what you want and you fully understand your paying more for the car than the value of its parts.
 
The ZT isn't an unreliable car. The K-Series was it's biggest flaw, the car is solid. Well put together and has a really good chassis with good handling.

How is it more expensive than anything else in the same bracket? Examples?
 
I cant think of anything more reliable thats similar money except perhaps something like a Lexus which isn't quite the same thing. The V8 is ridiculously unstressed and mass-produced on an epic scale. It's very basic, very simple and as a result not unreliable.
 
My dad had a 300hp+ ZT a while back, freakin awesome car. Sounded great with replacement exhaust. Can supercharge it but some suggest to avoid that as it can cripple te engine?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom