My sons looking for a new car & is considering a Mg Zr 2.0 Tdi.

They seem incredibly cheap both to buy & insure, insurance at 19 being the big plus.

Ive done a bit of research & it seems if you steer clear of the 1.4 Petrol which have a lot or reliability issues the Diesels are Ok & the facelift ones have a BMW based engine so even better although the older L series dosent seem to get any bad press,.

With the manufacturer no longer in existence I checked with the local MG dealer & all regular service items or things often needed tend to be readily available & unusual bits can normally be found somewhere.

Anyone any thoughts good or bad

I have a soft spot for Rovers. Brothers had an old 218is (non vvc) seemed to handle well however as with all k series regardless of engine displacement prone to HGF. Number of reasons for this however the location of the thermostat seems to be one of the causes.

No experience of the diesels.

The old L series diesel can be a bit agricultural but with regular servicing will go on for ever. Needs the cambelt doing roughly every 70k. The Td4 BMW is more refined and gets better fuel consumption.

Have you sat in one yet? I found the pre-face lift ones very cramped, and quite outdated feeling. Shame, as I really wanted to like the car. Not tried the pre-face lift ones though.

Only 3* crash test safety too, something you may want to factor in.

Have you sat in one yet? I found the pre-face lift ones very cramped, and quite outdated feeling. Shame, as I really wanted to like the car. Not tried the pre-face lift ones though.

Only 3* crash test safety too, something you may want to factor in.

His last car was a saxo VTR that somehow scaped a 2* but looking at this god knows how

the MG can only be better

Hes looking at a post facelift but I think not that different inside but after a Polo & a saxo I doubt it will be too cramped

Just looking at a few of those tests and it's amazing how much it's improved going from 205 > saxo > 306 > 406 > 407

Quite scary really.

I'm guessing it got 2 starts compared to those at the time, so perhaps it's time to move to diamonds so we know it's against new criteria.

His last car was a saxo VTR that somehow scaped a 2* but looking at this god knows how

the MG can only be better

Hes looking at a post facelift but I think not that different inside but after a Polo & a saxo I doubt it will be too cramped

I remember seeing a Saxo on the motorway that had been rear ended by a Sierra. The Ford needed a bit of T Cut on the front bumper, the Saxo looked like a right off. Had there been any rear seat passengers it would not of been a certainty that they would have survived

I vowed at that moment in time never to let either of my kids have a Saxo (or 106).

very cramped, and quite outdated feeling

This lol!

They were intentionaly designed to be cheap (effectivly it was a metro replacment at the start of its life). The ZR is a bit of a case of Rover getting there best turd polisher out coz they couldnt afford a proper super mini or small hatch.

Id always recomend one tho, for the money you will struggle to beat it. That turd polish they applied buffed up well!

Ive always fancied a ZR myself tbh.

J

This lol!

They were intentionaly designed to be cheap (effectivly it was a metro replacment at the start of its life). The ZR is a bit of a case of Rover getting there best turd polisher out coz they couldnt afford a proper super mini or small hatch.

Id always recomend one tho, for the money you will struggle to beat it. That turd polish they applied buffed up well!

Ive always fancied a ZR myself tbh.

J

Sat in the back of one yesterday whilst my son tested it, the first time I had been in one, suprised how good they actually are, a bargain for the bucks to be sure

When did they get the BMW engine? I always thought they were the 115hp version and never got the BMW engine like the 75/ZT did.

When did they get the BMW engine? I always thought they were the 115hp version and never got the BMW engine like the 75/ZT did.

I dont know if they have or if its a myth, Ive spoken to a few who thought they knew, including MG dealers, some say yes, some say no. I rang the Mg owners club technical help line (Briskoda hint) & the guy was emphatic they all had engines derived from the L series but from all I can glean a good engine. Also another pointer is the Zr has a cam belt & Im sure BMW always ran chains so Im now leaning towards it not being a BM derived engine but not sure.

As an aside, do you map them, my sons bound to try & find someone

Edited 31 October, 201015 yr by Stuart_J

I'm pretty sure they're all L series: only the 75 got the BMW lump.

l series remap

Apparently it gives around

158bhp and 240ftlb of torque

Yes, im also pretty sure all the ZR's are L series.

J

Edited 31 October, 201015 yr by r200ti

I'm leaning towards the above the 75 had the BMW block and the 25 (200) and 45 (400) had rovers own diesel. Which for the record is not a bad one.

The old man has had a few Rover diesels all see the better side of 200k

Apart from Rovers K-unit problems they were not bad cars, just very out dated!

I for one would not be upset if one was bought for me.

Mum had numerous Rovers, and the build quality was shocking.

I'd personally not touch one with a barge pole.

Mum had numerous Rovers, and the build quality was shocking.

I'd personally not touch one with a barge pole.

On the other hand my dad has always had rovers and never had a problem with them. Shame it cant be said for some of the other cars he has had since the last of his rovers.

Though my dad is one of them "run it into the ground" and "its there to do a job" he has no passion for cars................bikes on the other hand is a different story