Temporary car (Warning: Contains fail)

I have a lot more responsibility than I have had in the past, especially with having a house to look after, and a growing business to bring up.

The only time I really 'give it death' is on car meets, and that's the law really :p

It just seems like a minefield choosing something that isn't going to land me with massive bills all the time, a lot of BMWs seem to have components that either fail for fun, or cost the same as a small diamond to replace.
 
[TW]Fox;17751562 said:
I just think it would be a shame to see you buy something nice and then ruin it with the sort of bad decisions, ridiculous bodging and 'mates' who are 'monkeys, who climb' (or actually maybe your mates only do that to other peoples cars, cant remember) jumping on it as we've come to expect over the years :p

Every car you've owned has ended up scrapped, on fire, in bits, or broken. You repeatedly ignore advice from people who know better and seem unable to spot a good car if it jumped out of a bush and ate your leg. It's amusing when its old Rovers but if it was something nice it'd be a real shame.
Click to expand...

Don't worry, he got a bollocking from me about that and the last thing I'd do is let him near my car with a spanner.

I sort of consider the ZS to be a 'nice car', it's relatively new, in pretty good condition and is a nice drive, although I can see immediately why you and half of Motors would disagree. The reason I have it is purely due to low running costs, cheap insurance and a little performance thrown in too, clocking in at under £600 a year for insurance with all modifications declared and legit.

As I'm sure you'll recall, the ZS has not been 'scrapped, on fire, in bits', although admittedly it does need a little attention now.

Don't really know why I got so riled up last night, and I apologise. I suppose the way you (and others) can be all friendly one minute and at people's ankles the next is quite irritating at times.

When things have settled down, I'd love to have a car to look after and cherish. I treat the ZS like a child, never really spared a penny on it, but it is and will always be a Rover 400 with 'handling by Lotus' and not much more.
 
InvaderGIR said:
I can't help but laugh at that statement. :p

It's a diesel Rover with a bodykit. :p If you think it's a nice car...just wait until you get in a truely nice car. :D
Click to expand...

I have been, and can appreciate where you're coming from with the 'nice car' comments, sure the ZS drives very well, but it has zero creature comforts, and also lacks any attempt at sound deadening.

The only saving grace is that there's little to go wrong, and at 120,000 miles the car has a pretty clean sheet apart from a clutch, and normal servicing.

Thankfully it's not 'just' a diesel Rover, Lotus did a great job of getting the car into a state where bodyroll is non-existent and handling is the car's real saving grace.
 
I've driven most 'common' cars, I spent quite a long time searching before I picked the ZS.

It was the best handling car I could find at the time for the least money. Interior is crap, sound insulation is crap, but they handle better than anything else I drove at the time, and I did drive 2 different Mondeos. One was a 1999 ST200, and it was a good car but a little thirsty, and also was outhandled by the ZS. The other was a 2001 TDDi and while good, rolled like Dawn French on a water bed.

Before you slate, you should try chucking a ZS round some country roads.

Edit: Everything else Rover apart from the ZS doesn't really have redeeming features, apart from price. The ZS is the first car I've properly enjoyed driving, apart from the 620ti but only because that was comfy and fast, it didn't really handle.
 
Last edited:
InvaderGIR said:
So?

My point was that the handling of the Rovers/MGs shouldn't have needed Lotus's input and I can't see them being anywhere near as good as their competition ie e36/e46 BMWs, Mk2/Mk3 Mondeos, etc.
Click to expand...

IMO the ZS was much better than both Mondeos, I drove all 3 on the same day along with an Astra, and a Mazda 6.

It's all of course my opinion, and the Mondeo was indeed good. Just not as 'sporty' feeling as the ZS.
 
RSClio said:
Ahh are the ZS's much better? They are quite roomy upfront (Clios) but the back seats are pants ha!! :D
Click to expand...

Pretty big up front, quite small in the back. Nothing like a ZR though, I despised the one I drove. Feels like your sat on the car and not in it!
Just wish they'd spent a little more on shutting the damn thing up, wind noise is terrible.

I'm not fussed what people think, the ZS is a very capable car handling-wise. Being based on the double-wishbone suspension from the VTi as mentioned with some input from Lotus, and having the same chassis as the Integra, it certainly takes the twisties well.

Tiff Needell loved it, saying the ZS was 'the best front wheel drive car I've ever driven'. Can't be that bad then? :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
InvaderGIR said:
VX220 is slightly different to a Rover having some suspension designed by Lotus now isn't it.



Did he drive one with or without a boat anchor up front? ;)
Click to expand...

1. No it's not, they adjusted the entirety of the suspension setup to the extent there are only one or two parts of the whole assembly that are identical between the Rover 45 and MG ZS. The rest are specific to the ZS.

2. The diesel engine uses the same suspension setup as the 180 he drove, so yes, he did. Both engines have a very similar weight, and mine is about 20bhp off the V6, while having more torque.

InvFAIL
 
Mondeos are good all rounders, but they don't really have much on the handling front compared to a ZS.

I've always wanted one, I had one but other commitments meant I couldn't keep it. Hopefully this will be staying. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom