MG ZR question
- Thread starter Marshmule
- Start date
Better to look over at wwww.themgzr.co.uk
I had one for a year before the Audi, im sorry to say it was a complete pile of ****. The only good thing to say about the ZR is that it was was very economical however I think it was made of popcorn. I was only 18 months old and I had to replace the ECU, injector, HG, abs sensors………
I had one for a year before the Audi, im sorry to say it was a complete pile of ****. The only good thing to say about the ZR is that it was was very economical however I think it was made of popcorn. I was only 18 months old and I had to replace the ECU, injector, HG, abs sensors………
Last edited:
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
August 2001 it was introduced, so the first few will be Y plate.
Save loads of money, buy an old Rover 200, cover it in tat, fit some Koni shocks. It'll look the same, be just as dated, but handle a bit better.
And cost lots of money less, you can put the saving in the bank ready for when you decide to buy something good
Save loads of money, buy an old Rover 200, cover it in tat, fit some Koni shocks. It'll look the same, be just as dated, but handle a bit better.
And cost lots of money less, you can put the saving in the bank ready for when you decide to buy something good
Marshmule said:
They arnt bad cars, the 218iS (same as ZR120) is a fun chuckable backroad driver, but they arnt worth paying more than a couple of grand for at the absolute most.
Its an old car, there is no point in getting one unless its cheap. For the money the 218's are hard to beat, but the ZR's just take the pee
Soldato
- Joined
- 24 Dec 2004
- Posts
- 11,371
- Location
- Knowle, Solihull, UK
Don't know how I missed this thread
Sorry about the bump but they are more than a Rover 200 with stick on badges!
The suspension has been completely reworked!
They are far more of a drivers car than the 200/25 has ever been. The steering is far more communicative, they handle far better, etc
If they were just rebadged tat don't you think the reviews would have said this?
They have got good reviews - they've been saying how MG Rover has pulled off an impressive feat by making the 25 a drivers car
The 1.8 120+ is a good choice. Only a little bit more than the 105 to insure, quick (8.5 sec to 60) and half the price to insure than the 160
Get the + spec though. The standard spec is very basic - wind up windows, no central locking, etc
Sorry about the bump but they are more than a Rover 200 with stick on badges!
The suspension has been completely reworked!
They are far more of a drivers car than the 200/25 has ever been. The steering is far more communicative, they handle far better, etc
If they were just rebadged tat don't you think the reviews would have said this?
They have got good reviews - they've been saying how MG Rover has pulled off an impressive feat by making the 25 a drivers car
The 1.8 120+ is a good choice. Only a little bit more than the 105 to insure, quick (8.5 sec to 60) and half the price to insure than the 160
Get the + spec though. The standard spec is very basic - wind up windows, no central locking, etc
cymatty said:Didnt want to give a sweeping statment that would upset people.
Exactly, that's Fox's job
As said, the suspension etc has been reworked and the ZR/ZS are very good handling cars.
I think it was reworked by Lotus I think?
D4VE said:Exactly, that's Fox's job
As said, the suspension etc has been reworked and the ZR/ZS are very good handling cars.
I think it was reworked by Lotus I think?
Nope. The Z range were developed by Peter Stephens, of McLaren F1 fame.
