It went a few times?

am I been a bit daft here not fully understanding HG but I though if it went once you were very unlucky and it was a big job to get sorted then after that you should be fine.

It went a few times?

am I been a bit daft here not fully understanding HG but I though if it went once you were very unlucky and it was a big job to get sorted then after that you should be fine.

it is if you go main dealer, like 4 figure trouble! but i found a old rover tech who would do the whole lot for 200 quid. we found that the engine would never hold itself together for too long as i dtupidly ran the car for ages with a slight blown gasket the first time it went. i simply couldnt afford to have the car off the road nor afford to fix it at the time. the job of sorting the HG isnt hard. but the worst bit imoa is gettin all the crud out of the water ways. the omega ive just picked up has got a oil cooler gone and its put gunk into the water ways and im NOT looking forward to cleaning that up i can tell you

There are subtle differences that make an MG and a vRS a completely different car to drive compared to it's standard counterparts. Namely brakes, suspension, tuning of the engine, gear ratios etc. As i said, i've owned a 400 and a ZS. Pretty much the same chassis, but to drive they are oceans apart. I may get hung for saying this, but if it wasn't for the fuel econonmy , i would have bought a facelift ZS180 over the vRS. The V6 engines in those are fantastic and they look absolutely stunning.

OOOPS!:eek:

you should have heard the limited ZT v6. we had one in for service not so long ago all i can say is OH MY GOD WHAT A NOISE!!!

and i'd have to agree, ive got a rover 25 and a similar ZR that have been px'd and the difference in the drive is madeningly different

Mate of mine had a ZR 160.....engine went bang in it as it ate all its oil (over the space of a few days). Another mate had a ZR 105.....engine went bang in that too as it kept using oil like mad (not leaking it.....must've been burning it).

The K series engines were very good apart from the HG failures and the 2.0T things like the Tomcat were just mental. Rattly flimsy things but still mental.

Lad here at work also had a ZS 160. Sold it as it was killing him on fuel.

All of them said they were great fun to drive though. Brill handling and comfortable. It was just reliability issues and high running costs (fuel and insurance) that caused them to get rid.

In terms of the older ones (like old 214SEI's etc), many people run those things for years without fault. Remember, they used to be just Hondas in drag as the 2 had a partnership for years. A Honda Concerto was just a 200 series and the old 600 was an Accord.

The 75/ ZT was the only Rover designed by BMW and they're brilliant cars. Comfy, well kitted and in ZT form look quite nice. It's the lack of support you'd get through owning one (are there any dealers left) that would put me off.

I ran a '98 214si for a couple of years with no problems- regularly thrashed and had 120k on the clock when I got rid.

The K-Series is a cracking little engine if looked after properly- very revvy and a great power output for it's size/ weight. If the H/Gasket does go you can replace it with a heavier duty version with steel dowels for approx £400-£500 which should eliminate that problem.

They fit the 1.8 k series to the Lotus elise, and the head dowel modification is an essential modification, once that has been done it should be reliable.

In terms of the older ones (like old 214SEI's etc), many people run those things for years without fault. Remember, they used to be just Hondas in drag as the 2 had a partnership for years. A Honda Concerto was just a 200 series and the old 600 was an Accord.

Worst mistake Rover ever made, the Japanese go mad for old Minis, why the hell they shafted Honda and sold to BMW is beyond my comprehension.

Honda provided the reliablity and Rover provided the history and British styling, (and walnut!) it was a perfect match.

I had the original, a Triumph Acclaim - (Honda Ballade) I think, they were great cars with fantastic engines for their capacity 1.3.

They fit the 1.8 k series to the Lotus elise, and the head dowel modification is an essential modification, once that has been done it should be reliable.

Is there anyway to easily tell if this modification has been done, other than look for receipts or take the garages/owner's word on it?

Chris

Is there anyway to easily tell if this modification has been done, other than look for receipts or take the garages/owner's word on it?

Chris

No, not to my knowledge, however If I was after an Elise (and hopefully I will be one day) I think it is important to have history, there are loads of cherished Elise's out there and loads of thrashed ones too! Any driver who looks after his car should have kept the receipts of work done. I would have though that many older Elise's would have had this work done because I guess that they would get driven harder than the Rover cars that that engine orginally came from and that most would have had head gasket failures by now.

(The later cars got Toyota engines which are reliable but lacking in torque)

mmmm Lotus Elise with a VAG 20vt.... That would be perfect!

My first car was a '94 Rover Metro, which I bought in '98. Loved the willing engine, positive gear change, wonderful non-assisted steering and very tidy handling. But in the four years I owned it:

-it failed an MOT because of a suspension problem

-it needed a petrol tank as soon as it was out of warranty

-it needed the fuse box replacing (this caused a breakdown)

-it needed a clutch at 65k miles

And of course I didn't drive 80 miles a day back then. Glad I didn't have a big accident in it too (no passive safety to speak of). Still have fond memories though and to be fair most early 90s cars were nowhere near there counterparts today in terms of build and reliability. I'm really sorry Rover is gone but when you look at the competition in the market at the moment (Skoda is a good example) it's easy to see why they had such a hard time.

My first car was a '94 Rover Metro, which I bought in '98. Loved the willing engine, positive gear change, wonderful non-assisted steering and very tidy handling. But in the four years I owned it:

-it failed an MOT because of a suspension problem

-it needed a petrol tank as soon as it was out of warranty

-it needed the fuse box replacing (this caused a breakdown)

-it needed a clutch at 65k miles

And of course I didn't drive 80 miles a day back then. Glad I didn't have a big accident in it too (no passive safety to speak of). Still have fond memories though and to be fair most early 90s cars were nowhere near there counterparts today in terms of build and reliability. I'm really sorry Rover is gone but when you look at the competition in the market at the moment (Skoda is a good example) it's easy to see why they had such a hard time.

My VRS makes that look like a paragon of reliability.