Omg Rover 75!

ElRazur · 17 Oct 2006 at 14:59

My friend just had one in as a courtesy and my god, it looks and drive beautiful. How come people dont talk much about them here? It would also appear to be going for cheap and they come equip with plenty of toys. The one i saw was the 2litre v6....am impressed. Please tell me more. Parkers gave it 4 out of five stars overall and states that it is better than a mondeo (eat you heart fox)! Anyone driven one and your thoughts please...

PS
I love the dash board lay out - very tasteful and brititsh.

Dogbreath · 17 Oct 2006 at 15:06

Friends dad has the MG ZT 260 which has the Mustang V8 and RWD. He's just had a supercharger conversion as well so up to 400bhp!

Vastly underrated cars IMO, but the smaller engined ones are distinctly underpowered. If you like wafting along in supreme comfort on a small budget they are hard to beat.

Sirrel Squirrel · 17 Oct 2006 at 15:10

My parents had one and I have to agree it was a very nice car, they then changed it for a ZT, which was also a very good car, pretty damn quick too. They now have a common BMW 3 series though

Scuzi · 17 Oct 2006 at 15:14

I think they're the only decent Rover out there but due to the horrible reputation the other models give the name, the 75 seems to suffer poor sales and low prices. This can be used to your advantage though in that you get an excellent armchair motorway cruiser for peanuts.

Rilot · 17 Oct 2006 at 15:35

Lovely cars. A few of my friends have them and they drive superbly.

Matt-Page · 17 Oct 2006 at 15:36

Probably oone of the best cars to come out of the Rover factory in the last 10 years.

I have driven a 2.5 litre one. Agreed you can pick them up dirt cheap and they are exceptionaly comfortable and smooth to drive. It's like a jag inside with the carpets and high wuality finishings.

Not driven a RWD one but i would imagine the back end kicks out a bit with all that weight.

D4VE · 17 Oct 2006 at 15:38

They're quite nice, but not a patch on some rivals such as the IS200 or Accord.

If you are spending a few grand then thats not an issue, but if you are spending >10k you can get better cars for the money

moss · 17 Oct 2006 at 15:47

Matt-Page said:
Not driven a RWD one but i would imagine the back end kicks out a bit with all that weight.

After reading the PH review it seems quite the opposite, they pushed it hard and couldnt get it to shift.

Gibbo · 17 Oct 2006 at 15:48

D4VE said:
They're quite nice, but not a patch on some rivals such as the IS200 or Accord.

If you are spending a few grand then thats not an issue, but if you are spending >10k you can get better cars for the money

Hi there

Depends how you look at it. An Accord neither Lexus can compete with the 75's interior, they are a real nice place to be. Yes the Accord and Lexus will offer better reliability and build quality no doubt but if there is one thing the British do great, that is car interiors.

Sone · 17 Oct 2006 at 15:53

Gibbo said:
Depends how you look at it. An Accord neither Lexus can compete with the 75's interior, they are a real nice place to be. Yes the Accord and Lexus will offer better reliability and build quality no doubt but if there is one thing the British do great, that is car interiors.

shame its only that and comedy

v0n · 17 Oct 2006 at 15:53

I'm just not going to agree and point out one of the reasons Rover 75 was never popular or discussed is because they were never cheap, and that includes the situation now. Few years back a pricetag on Rover 75 with "good spec" and pokey engine was just a tad short of 30 grand. V8 was 33 grand. None of the standard engines were particularly fast, if they approached 8.5 second mark they were just outright thirsty. None of the luxurious trims were particularly luxurious for its price. You could have it all and more in Mondeo for at least 8 grand less. They would often presume "top spec" was mismatched cream leather seats with white, almost glowing in the dark dashboard and steering wheel. Or colour inserts in upholstery. Or cassette player. Or white MG dials in dark chestnut wood trim. Rover specs and prices, especially before going under, were ridicule to themselves.

Trademark curly wood, blinding white elephant skin trim with mismatched deco black seats with white rubber edges. For conesseurs indeed.

Even now, when SMC advertises two years old bancrupt stock unregistered examples for £19.999 everyone looks around for hidden cameras and Jeremy Beadle as they expect it to be a "you've been framed" set up.

D4VE · 17 Oct 2006 at 16:25

Gibbo said:
Hi there

Depends how you look at it. An Accord neither Lexus can compete with the 75's interior, they are a real nice place to be. Yes the Accord and Lexus will offer better reliability and build quality no doubt but if there is one thing the British do great, that is car interiors.

I would agree in part and disagree in part. The design of the interior on the 75 is great, thats for sure and I agree it is a nice place to be.
However, it does feel a LOT cheaper than the Accord/Lexus. The new Accord is very well build throughout and although design wise it is all black and boring to look at (like the Lexus) everything is reassuringly put together.
On the Rover, the switches, vents and glovebox lid felt quite cheap.

My father is rather heavy handed and I didnt fancy him having the 75 over the Accord/Lexus.

It was a 2004 2.5 V6 auto which we drove and it sounded gorgeous and looked great inside and out.
Full leather, electric seats cruise control etc.

Id still have a ZT 190 or ZT V8 myself as I can look past these things and I do like the 75 shape as its like nothing else

Rotty · 17 Oct 2006 at 16:32

only time I ever drove one the whole experience was ruined by having to sit with your legs at a strange angle , the pedlas were offset by a huge amount

Dogbreath · 17 Oct 2006 at 17:16

v0n said:
they were never cheap, and that includes the situation now.

Have to disagree, there are quite a few bargains available IMO. Have a quick browse through Ebay and autotrader e.g.

2002 Rover 75 CDT Classic SE

58073 miles, manual £3999

This is for a 4 year old, low mileage luxury car with a BMW diesel engine. If you can put up with driving the 1.8 petrol engined cars they can be had for nearly half that.

Or you could get a repmobile TDCi with twice the mileage and half the toys.

tom_nieto · 17 Oct 2006 at 18:23

I happened to walk past an MG ZT-T V8 earlier. A rare beast indeed. Nice looking thing, something I definitely would consider if I was on the lookout for a v8 barge.

Nor · 17 Oct 2006 at 18:27

Rover and MG made good cars in my opinion. I've owned loads in the past and currently own a MG ZS 180 and it's great. I don't know why they get slated, perhaps it's the old age British self-deprication thing.

davidstone28 · 17 Oct 2006 at 19:14

Personally, I'm not a fan of the shape but I have to admit that the detailing is original and they're massively underated cars. Superb ride and lovely interior (if you're into that look).

What's the situation nowadays with regard to getting spares or components for them?

ElRazur · 17 Oct 2006 at 19:16

Hmmm just reading up on these car and people are saying the auto gearbox should be avoided...Shame i love autos.

commited · 17 Oct 2006 at 19:40

Just sold dads 01 75 2.0v6. Was a great car with plenty of poke.

I'll get one in a few years - I just feel a little young at the mo

BigglesPiP · 17 Oct 2006 at 19:55

They are cheap because Rover went bust, because the cars are cheap quality.

There was a bad batch of front springs on 25s. Instead of recalling for springs, they recalled them all to fit a guard, so that if the springs shattered, the brakes would be OK, despite the fact that the front of the car would then be grinding along on the radiator.