Well, I picked the GSi up...

agw_01 said:
Hmmm, is it an RT meet, or one from here? Might have to check out the thread.

Well, I was going to definitely get the wheels for the 214 as I didn't want to put 17's on it, but seeing as how I have the GSi now I think I'm after some 17's.

If you've got a use for them, then that's great. I just didn't want to disappoint you after telling you I'd have them for so long. I'm not saying I definitely don't want them, but if you need them then that's fine with me :)
Click to expand...

Andy, as we disscussed it isnt a rt only meet but Simon is organising it over on rt with very reasonable prices both for entry and track time. me n clive are going so you wanna convoy? 22nd april is the date.

prices are on rt in national events section.
 
I like it so much better in the 3 door type than the 5 door, i hate the colour tho, the red was a much nicer, but i guess its whats under the hood that counts ;)

thedazman
 
Jez said:
Now you can probably relate to my comments about how weedy the little 1.4 is :p

Glad you are enjoying it anyway :)

but i still think it should have been turbo time and just put a grans address on the insurance ;)
Click to expand...

I think that for a 1.4 the Rover engines are pretty great (only in the power department). The 16v is over 100bhp and my 8v is around 75bhp. The power band is quite high up the rev range but it's not hard to keep the revs in the band throughout the gears. Probably get's to 60 in 12seconds and I imagine the 16v engine around 10. Considering the car is around a ton that's about the same speed and weight as my 2.0 mondeo!

However, the 200 series is a nasty car and I cant get rid of mine quick enough. Just gotta sort out finances and work out exactly what I need and want.
 
Jez said:
Now you can probably relate to my comments about how weedy the little 1.4 is :p
Click to expand...

I actually drove the 214 for a short while today.

I don't know what to say... it felt like the clutch was slipping :confused: :D

The difference between the two really is massive. Pickup from low revs in 2nd and 3rd is so impressive, even more so when it hits 2000rpm. It pulls right up to the redline.

Simon, I don't know about that. Mine seems pretty free-revving. Certainly no different from the 214 apart from the torque kicks in at 2000rpm instead of 4000rpm. The noise is the main difference. The K sounded great after 4000rpm, the T just sounds awesome ticking at idle... a really nice burble. When revved it sounds very throaty... and that's on the standard backbox.

Mike, the convoy sounds good. How easy was it to get to yours from the junction I left you at? Your car sounded ace when you put your foot down before... but I just couldn't resist going after you :D

Daz, yeah the 3 door is definitely growing on me, so is the colour. I'd have preferred nightfire red but I really like the charcoal. Even one of my mates, who constantly joked about my car being a grandad car said the 220 was very smart.
 
Tesla said:
...
Click to expand...

Yep, I timed mine at 10.5 seconds to 60. I don't care what people say, for the engines' power output and size of the Mk2, I was very impressed. What annoys me now, is people who have started slating the 214 whereas before I got the 220 they were impressed with the performance of it.
 
agw_01 said:
Yep, I timed mine at 10.5 seconds to 60. I don't care what people say, for the engines' power output and size of the Mk2, I was very impressed. What annoys me now, is people who have started slating the 214 whereas before I got the 220 they were impressed with the performance of it.
Click to expand...
The 214's performance is very good remembering it is a 214.

For me that's about where it ends. Other than good value for money if you are on a smaller budget.

If I had £1-£2k I wouldn't go near one though.
 
I'm not sure how you tend to drive, agw_01, but something the 220GSi should excel at vs. the 214 is high speed driving. I remember from my SEi that at 85mph+, initiating a swift overtaking maneuver could be a bit of a hassle. Now with 136 lb-ft (vs. 91 lb-ft) at the disposal of the right foot it must be rather swift in comparison :)

Every time I see your threads about Rover, agw_01, it reminds me how much I want another one. You're making me feel bad :(
 
Andy,

its dead easy to get to mine from wher you left me.. down the m62 to junction 10 i think(where ever it meets the m6). you just head for birmingham south on m6 and id met you at services on m6 if you want.

bear in mind, it took me just under an hour from when i left you to get home.

mine does sound nice you right. :p
 
agw_01 said:
Yep, I timed mine at 10.5 seconds to 60. I don't care what people say, for the engines' power output and size of the Mk2, I was very impressed. What annoys me now, is people who have started slating the 214 whereas before I got the 220 they were impressed with the performance of it.
Click to expand...
The revised 1.4 16v K-Series had 105PS (103hp). Even today manufacturers will rarely (extract more than 100PS out of a NASP non-varycam 1.4 - even VAG's 1.4 FSI for example stops at 100PS. I think that statement alone goes to show just how remarkable the power output of the engine was 11 years ago.
 
i agree with simon, mine seems like a lazy revver in comparison with yours andy, as we discussed.

i reckon this is due to the box fitted to yours. its certainly quicker than mine
 
Hi Andy

Looks good mate , nicer than your other one but you defentley need some new alloys :p
make sure you take it easy , especially in this rather cold weather :)

P.S book your silverstone tickets ;)

Enjoy it mate

Sam
 
rover220 said:
i dont know if its a torsen but im fairly sure its from an 820 with lower ratios cos it sems a damnsite quicker than mine.
Click to expand...

the revs at certain speeds are also higher which leads me to believe that its not a 220 box at all.
 
wow, i think that the charcoal hatch is even nicer than that 214SEi i was going to buy andy :o and that's with the stock alloys! :o

That is sweet as hell man, also get your arse on MSN :p

Tom.
 
PMKeates said:
I remember from my SEi that at 85mph+, initiating a swift overtaking maneuver could be a bit of a hassle. Now with 136 lb-ft (vs. 91 lb-ft) at the disposal of the right foot it must be rather swift in comparison :)
Click to expand...

I'm sure Mike (rover220) can vouch for me when I tell you that I went from 70 to 110mph... rather ******* quickly while on the motorway yesterday.

There was a punto in the outside lane, I put my foot down a bit to edge forward, he eventually moved over, so I booted it... in 5th. Jesus christ, it reminded me of when I had a ride in my boss's BMW 645. The speed it picked up was so impressive.

I had the pleasure of rocketing past a chav'd up Corsa on the way too. It must have caught their attention as I moved to the inside lane at 60mph to wait for Mike (:D) The Corsa came past and one of the chavs was pulling a weird face... so I think I got their attention, lol.

Going to have to take it easy though. I've got Pirelli P6000's on the front :(

PMKeates, you must really like Rover to mention all that about the power output and not once mention HGF. :) That's it though... the K wasn't all about HGF. If you were unlucky, you'd have it once every 90,000 miles.

Tom, it's definitely growing on me. And seeing that photoshop of it lowered is making me dribble, lol. I actually prefer the stock alloys on lowered suspension. It keeps its stealth I think. The GSi has uprated suspension as standard... it seemed to handle MUCH better than the 214 when I took it along the MM roads yesterday. Not much body roll at all!
 
agw_01 said:
There was a punto in the outside lane, I put my foot down a bit to edge forward, he eventually moved over, so I booted it... in 5th. Jesus christ, it reminded me of when I had a ride in my boss's BMW 645.
Click to expand...

Are you seriously saying that accelerating in the outside lane of the Motorway in a Rover 220, a 2 litre 4 cylinder, reminded you of the time your boss did the same thing in his brand new 4.4 litre V8 powered BMW?

Please, tell me you are not?
 
PMKeates said:
The revised 1.4 16v K-Series had 105PS (103hp). Even today manufacturers will rarely (extract more than 100PS out of a NASP non-varycam 1.4 - even VAG's 1.4 FSI for example stops at 100PS. I think that statement alone goes to show just how remarkable the power output of the engine was 11 years ago.
Click to expand...

The swift GTI is 101bhp, and that is an OLD design. Even more impressive is the 100bhp from the 106 1.3 rallye engine (8V).

My friends rover was loved by his grandad and then handed to him. It does seem to go quite well for a little engine.... nothing on my other friends coupe though :)

What was it you were saying on msn AGW? I wont say too much about it....... now look at you after driving it ;) Nice car anyway :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom