Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Rover 75 [split thread]
Options
-
06-12-2009 11:44pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
I did read it. Did you read the first half of my post before you posted that rather silly start to yours? Wow, this is fun!If you'd bother to read what I said properly and actually try to understand it, you wouldn't have posted that rather silly first half of your post.
It's the same car with a sportier interior+exterior+suspension. It wasn't any more expensive, it was an alternative to the 75 depending on what you wanted from the car.How many changes have MG made to the 75 chassis?
Yes it was, read any of the press about it and you'll see that.The 75 was never in the class above the Mondeo, it was half considered one because of how well it was spec'd.
It didn't fit well though, it was in the same kind of limbo as the Saab 9-5/Volvo S60.
Door cards are held on by plastic clips, these can break when the cards being removed and should be replaced(cost about 15c each) but crap/lazy/cheap mechanics don't bother. Isn't a problem with the car.I've been in two, and both the panels were coming away from the doors
Happens with literally any car make, depends on the individual car.numerous squeaks and rattles that nearly drove me round the twist
Not your cup of tea doesn't mean it's "woeful".softly sprung isn't my cup of tea anyway, so I wasn't blown away by the ride
The x-type never fit in well in that class either, hence why sales were about half what were expected at best(and usually far worse).Taking the X-type, you're right, that's in the class up, against the C-class, 3-series, IS and A4.
Non english press seem to disagree, universally seem to agree on "good but not amazing, sports suspension option tightens it a bit but not enough to pay off the loss in comfort".The 3-series is the best handling of that lot, by a long way (I'm talking about last gen stuff here), except for the X-type. It's a better handling car than the X-type, but not by a long way.
Because english press are to the Mondeo, like VAGheads are to the TredDI.In fact Autocar often have compared the Mondeo with the 3-series directly and apart from steering feel and turn-in being more direct in the RWD, there was feck all between them.
As good a car as it is(and it really is), it's not the ambrosia that british motoring press always claim it to be.
Because it has a Jaguar badge? It doesn't have any better residuals than a 75/Accord/Superb.But the x-type is in a different class.
Stop saying simples in condescending posts to other users?And stop saying simples in your condecending posts to other users. It sounds retarded.
Where else have I said it?
Who to?
Are you exaggerating because I upset you?
I'm sorry.
The way as soon as someone agreed with you you jump in and bang on about some sense in the thread, and people who disagree should be banned speaks volumes.
Seriously, are you old enough to even drive a car?
@Niceirishfella, you're basing your opinion on one fella you know who had one.
So basically, you're the same type as the anti Alfa/Fiat/Whatever brigade who gets universally derided on here for forming an opinion based on one car.
@Tred - In the topgear survey, the 75 places around the same as the x-type. Reliability is a known problem with the x-type and it's developed a bit of a bad reputation for it, and in user reviews the x-type generally does worse.
If you dislike the car that's fine. There's plenty of cars I dislike(if don't downright hate), but if you can't have a logical argument about it - you shouldn't state an opinion. I'm passionate about my car, but I can recognise it's flaws(in ZT guise, suspension can be harsh at times and rear space+boot could be a bit better, in 75 - old man image, interior which is completely love it or hate it, low residuals among others).
A couple of people on this thread can't do the same, it's sticking your fingers in your ears and going "I hate it, you're wrong because I hate it and that's that".
Grow up
PS: Skoda Superb
Rover 75
X-Type
Yup, the x-type is definitely the paragon of style while the 75 is an ugly duckling like the Superb.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
I've highlighted the points of interest. Sportier is a marketing term. Stiffer suspension does not a drivers car make. There's much more to it than that. You can throw stiffer suspension at a B5.5 Passat but while it may not pitch and roll as much, it still won't be a good handling car. Same with the 75.I did read it. Did you read the first half of my post before you posted that rather silly start to yours? Wow, this is fun!
It's the same car with a sportier interior+exterior+suspension. It wasn't any more expensive, it was an alternative to the 75 depending on what you wanted from the car.
Yes it was, read any of the press about it and you'll see that.
It didn't fit well though, it was in the same kind of limbo as the Saab 9-5/Volvo S60.
Door cards are held on by plastic clips, these can break when the cards being removed and should be replaced(cost about 15c each) but crap/lazy/cheap mechanics don't bother. Isn't a problem with the car.
Happens with literally any car make, depends on the individual car.
Not your cup of tea doesn't mean it's "woeful".
The x-type never fit in well in that class either, hence why sales were about half what were expected at best(and usually far worse).
Non english press seem to disagree, universally seem to agree on "good but not amazing, sports suspension option tightens it a bit but not enough to pay off the loss in comfort".
Because english press are to the Mondeo, like VAGheads are to the TredDI.
As good a car as it is(and it really is), it's not the ambrosia that british motoring press always claim it to be.
Because it has a Jaguar badge? It doesn't have any better residuals than a 75/Accord/Superb.
Stop saying simples in condescending posts to other users?
Where else have I said it?
Who to?
Are you exaggerating because I upset you?
I'm sorry.
The way as soon as someone agreed with you you jump in and bang on about some sense in the thread, and people who disagree should be banned speaks volumes.
Seriously, are you old enough to even drive a car?
@Niceirishfella, you're basing your opinion on one fella you know who had one.
So basically, you're the same type as the anti Alfa/Fiat/Whatever brigade who gets universally derided on here for forming an opinion based on one car.
@Tred - In the topgear survey, the 75 places around the same as the x-type. Reliability is a known problem with the x-type and it's developed a bit of a bad reputation for it, and in user reviews the x-type generally does worse.
If you dislike the car that's fine. There's plenty of cars I dislike(if don't downright hate), but if you can't have a logical argument about it - you shouldn't state an opinion. I'm passionate about my car, but I can recognise it's flaws(in ZT guise, suspension can be harsh at times and rear space+boot could be a bit better, in 75 - old man image, interior which is completely love it or hate it, low residuals among others).
A couple of people on this thread can't do the same, it's sticking your fingers in your ears and going "I hate it, you're wrong because I hate it and that's that".
Grow up
PS: Skoda Superb
Rover 75
X-Type
Yup, the x-type is definitely the paragon of style while the 75 is an ugly duckling like the Superb.
Read any review on the 75? You criticise the British press bias for the Mondeo, and I agree, it does exist, but that's nothing compared to their bais for their beloved home-grown (despite the German influence) Rover 75.
You're saying it's not unreliable, and the x-type is, but you also say they place around the same in the Top Gear survey?
And on style, the x-type wouldn't be what I'd call a lovely car, it's OK just. But compared to the bland-box Superb and ugly-car-made-uglier MG in those pics, it's almost pretty!
And yes, you're right, I'm not old enough to drive, I'm only 4 and a half. But I'm very clever for a 4 and a half year old, I can use the internet all by myself!!
As for experience with them, last company I worked for 5 people were silly enough to get them as company cars. One guy even replaced his with another one! I was in 3 of them, drove one of them on long trips. Every single one of them had problems more than once and had to come to work in something else while their cars were back. The guy who was silly enough to make the same mistake twice had problems with both of his. I don't judge cars only on reliability, but seeing as I can't see anything else going for the 75...
0 -
I have the workshop manual for both, differences between the cars are minimal and really do mainly come down to suspension+tyres.I've highlighted the points of interest. Sportier is a marketing term. Stiffer suspension does not a drivers car make. There's much more to it than that. You can throw stiffer suspension at a B5.5 Passat but while it may not pitch and roll as much, it still won't be a good handling car. Same with the 75.
Yet again you're admitting you have no experience with it, but you're saying you're right and no-one can say differently to change your mind.
The 75 was never beloved - biased, yes, beloved - hardly. It's always had the love/hate thing going for it.Read any review on the 75? You criticise the British press bias for the Mondeo, and I agree, it does exist, but that's nothing compared to their bais for their beloved home-grown (despite the German influence) Rover 75.
It's not a reliability survey per se, it's an ownership survey where motorists rate their car based on 10 criteria.You're saying it's not unreliable, and the x-type is, but you also say they place around the same in the Top Gear survey?
The X-Type's unique selling point was it's aspirational value. For not an inconceivable amount over a Mondeo, people could own a Jaguar. Hence why it'll always be rated higher than a Mondeo - because even if it isn't actually better, owners will want it to be.
What? Company Cars that do massive mileage having problems? DEAR GOD, THE WORLD HAS GONE MAD!As for experience with them, last company I worked for 5 people were silly enough to get them as company cars. One guy even replaced his with another one! I was in 3 of them, drove one of them on long trips. Every single one of them had problems more than once and had to come to work in something else while their cars were back.
Dads Mondeo company car has been off the road twice(faulty injector once, battery dying the second time and stranding him). Does that make his Mondeo a heap of crap like you imply?
Perhaps he just liked the car?The guy who was silly enough to make the same mistake twice had problems with both of his. I don't judge cars only on reliability, but seeing as I can't see anything else going for the 75...
Irish people hate MG-Rover, it's a given(and there isn't even a particular reason why, just like how we hate white cars).
Hence why residuals are **** over here, and in some cases they're as cheap as in the UK/NI without even adding VRT on top of the foreign cars. I'd still never buy an irish car, as after a lot of viewings - no-one takes care of them over here.
I can probably list every common problem with the 75, but then I can with the x-type too(because I considered that as my new car and actually researched it rather than calling it a tarted up mondeo).
The 75 isn't a perfect car, it isn't even a great car. But for a limited cachet, it will be. Just like the X-Type.
A surprising amount of people mistake unreliability with a car that hasn't been maintained properly. Trim being lose? A matter of tightening screws or replacing plastic clips. Windows not going down properly? Greasing the regulator or adjusting it.
A good mechanic will do all that during a proper service, a bad one will replace filters and bulbs and give the dash a shine.0 -
-
OK, now you're just being unreasonable. I have experience with the 75, and was asking the question directly to you, oh experienced one (!), about the differences between the 75 and the ZT. I did state that I can't imagine how MG could tweak a mediocre chassis into a good handling car. According to your reply, looks like I was right, they didn't.I have the workshop manual for both, differences between the cars are minimal and really do mainly come down to suspension+tyres.
Yet again you're admitting you have no experience with it, but you're saying you're right and no-one can say differently to change your mind.
I'm not a Mondeo fan, but it's a good place to start. Is an A4 really that much better than a Passat? I know exactly where the Jag comes from and the opinions owners may have or what they might like to believe.The 75 was never beloved - biased, yes, beloved - hardly. It's always had the love/hate thing going for it.
It's not a reliability survey per se, it's an ownership survey where motorists rate their car based on 10 criteria.
The X-Type's unique selling point was it's aspirational value. For not an inconceivable amount over a Mondeo, people could own a Jaguar. Hence why it'll always be rated higher than a Mondeo - because even if it isn't actually better, owners will want it to be.
Good lad. Point out where I said massive mileage anywhere. None of them did massive mileage, they were all senior managers who used them to commute all of about 4 miles to work. I don't think any of them did much more than 15k a year. But who knows, maybe that really is massive mileage for a Rover!!What? Company Cars that do massive mileage having problems? DEAR GOD, THE WORLD HAS GONE MAD!
Nope.Dads Mondeo company car has been off the road twice(faulty injector once, battery dying the second time and stranding him). Does that make his Mondeo a heap of crap
Where exactly?like you imply?
He did, the poor eejit!Perhaps he just liked the car?
That's more like it! A little bit of reason goes a long way!The 75 isn't a perfect car, it isn't even a great car. But for a limited cachet, it will be.
Maintained properly? A well built car won't need any maintenance to keep the trim in place!!A surprising amount of people mistake unreliability with a car that hasn't been maintained properly. Trim being lose? A matter of tightening screws or replacing plastic clips. Windows not going down properly? Greasing the regulator or adjusting it.
A good mechanic will do all that during a proper service, a bad one will replace filters and bulbs and give the dash a shine.
Old Toyotas used rust to crap, is that because the owners didn't maintain them by drying them with a towel after a shower of rain?0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
The 75 turned out to be a pile of junk. Build Quality and problems.
What? The 75 is a decent luxury comfortable and safe car. There are few known problems with the 75 (apart from the design fault of the K-series) and build quality is quite good. Certainly not worse than the X-type. The only thing you can't compare the 75 with the X-type on is second hand price. The X-type commands a premium over a bog standard D-class car like an Avensis or a Vectra, but you get a discount on a 75
0 -
neilthefunkeone wrote: »The ol lad has a '05 2.0diesel.
Case in point, it's for ol lads ............:D
@Unkel, you state the X-type and the 75 were in direct competition?
Like WTF are you on about? The X type was marketed towards young execs to try and lure them out of the Bm3series etc, and the Rover was Marketed for the Retired Sales manager of 50+
You're so deluded - you're sucking on your pipe to much in your 75. Your continued defence of the Rover 75 here in laughable.
:) 0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
The 75 wasn't a mediocre chassis, it was a chassis aimed at ride comfort.OK, now you're just being unreasonable. I have experience with the 75, and was asking the question directly to you, oh experienced one (!), about the differences between the 75 and the ZT. I did state that I can't imagine how MG could tweak a mediocre chassis into a good handling car. According to your reply, looks like I was right, they didn't.
The body was stiffer than competing BMW's at time(hence the ridiculously big transmission tunnel which can be irritating in the back), it had a modified BMW z-axle rear suspension(used on cars like the 8 series, M1, early Z cars and e36 3 series) and mcpherson struts at the front.
The 75 has very soft suspension settings, bushings and springs - hence why it wallows but rides so comfortably.
The ZT, they tuned the settings put on 18inch wheels(which was a little OTT to be fair), different bushings and stiffer springs. That's all. As I said, when you have the workshop manual and can look up part codes, it's quite easy to tell what they physically changed.
Not a big difference.
Happy to accept you're wrong yet?
It will when whenever a mechanic needs to repair or check something inside the doors, he has to replace plastic screws. When they don't, trim hangs on and one by one the rest fail.Maintained properly? A well built car won't need any maintenance to keep the trim in place!!
How is rust comparable to squeaky windows that don't sit down quite right, and the trim panels on the doors not being held on?Old Toyotas used rust to crap, is that because the owners didn't maintain them by drying them with a towel after a shower of rain?0 -
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
There's a good few supercharged ZT 260's pushing between 360-420bhp with no reported problems with the running gear(and this is after having them supercharged for years).
Supercharger installation costs around £6,000, but when a supercharged one comes up for sale, it's generally only around £2-£2.5k more expensive.
Not bad, now if only my hours hadn't been cut 0
This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement