|
|
Post by indianajones on Feb 18, 2013 5:09:05 GMT
I think I'll have to shelve my Wedge dreams for the time being. As much as I'd like one, I'm gonna need something a bit more modern for the wife to drive around in (and hopefully soon a child!). So I'm open to suggestions. Will have to be auto, but not CVT. Ideally around 1.6-1.8L, 2.0L is the max size as this will be an around town car mainly. I have my eye on one of these: www.trademe.co.nz/Browse/Listing.aspx?id=561630843 What I like about it is the leather interior and the fact it doesn't have the K-series engine. Anyone driven/own one before? I'm also looking at Peugeots too. Cheers, Andrew |
|
|
|
Post by indianajones on Feb 18, 2013 9:51:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick RS on Feb 18, 2013 12:44:37 GMT
I had three of these when they were new as I worked for Rover Cars at the time. The 1.6 auto was the most closely related to Honda due to the powertrain, the earlier ones even had a Honda steering wheel with a Rover badge as opposed to the standard (and nicer) Rover item. My main memory of the auto was its thirst for fuel with about 25MPG about normal (you'll have to translate that). There were one or two with water leaks but they should have been well sorted by now. The saloon version had an enormous boot / trunk and could carry much more than the hatch as long as it wasn't bulky. I've a friend who still used a 1.4K manual and is very happy with it, very little gone wrong.
The Rover 600 was a better built car and always had good scores in the internal faults per car measures that we used at the time. If you find one the 2.0 litre auto is a better drive than the 1.8 auto and more economical - I had both.
happy daze - Nick
|
|
|
|
Post by kelsham on Feb 18, 2013 15:26:09 GMT
I agree about the Rover 600 being a good car. I am looking for a diesel version in a desultory fashion.
Regards Kels.
|
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Feb 18, 2013 16:33:02 GMT
Great, Andrew!
Go get a Rover! I'm not familiar with the 400, but know the 600 very well!
I'm on my second 600 turbo, a 1999, and it's been my daily car for over a year now. It was very cheap and only needed a new regulator, rear silencer and some new tyres. Since then it has not required anything and works brilliantly! Even through the rough arctic winter we've had now.
I dare to say the 600, at least in my opinion, is a very good and relible car in deed. Of course, you should look for a decent example and if going for a TI this is very important. The turbo has, even by today's standards breathtaking performance and some of them may have been driven hard.
The TI engines (real Rover, the ordinairy 600s are Honda powered) are marvellous and very reliable in my experience. Also, they are not at all thirsty.
As mentioned before, I bought the present 600 because I was fed up with my Peugeot 406 which had very low miles but endless problems... So I wouldn't dream of a Pug compared with the Rover!
Obviously, steer clear off Rovers with headgasket/ cooling problems. (some K- series?)
My advice is: find a good 600 turbo and enjoy a fun and reliable car! I'm happy to give you advice on what to look for, should you find one.
BTW, the 600 went straight through the Norwegian MOT today!
Regards, Tommy
|
|
|
|
Post by tommydp on Feb 18, 2013 18:48:01 GMT
Oooops, just saw it would have to be auto.. I'm not sure, but I don't think the Turbo had auto as an option..
An ordinairy 600 it is then! Go get it!
Tommy;-)
|
|
|
|
Post by indianajones on Feb 18, 2013 19:02:42 GMT
Cheers for all the imput lads, 25mpg isn't too bad given the size/nature of the car. It won't be used daily really, just for the shopping and the mrs to go places. I've been told to say well away from 200 series Rovers with the 1.6 K-series engine. Will keep my eyes open for a Rover 600 too if you reckon they're a bit better on the gas than the 400. Edit: like this one? www.trademe.co.nz/motors/used-cars/rover/auction-561683562.htmDo they run a Honda engine too? -Andrew |
|
|
|
Post by Nick RS on Feb 18, 2013 19:28:33 GMT
618, 620 and 623 petrol engines were Honda apart from the 620ti which used Rover's T series, Tommy is right the ti was good on fuel despite its power but again manual only. The other one is the L series diesel but from memory that was manual only too.
Years ago I lent my Flame Red ti to Rover's Marketing team for photography for an advert likening it to Jekyll & Hide. I'll try and dig out a copy.
Nick
|
|
|
|
Post by indianajones on Feb 18, 2013 19:31:09 GMT
Cheers for that Nick.
If the mpg of the 2.0 & 2.3L is the near/the same as the 1.6L then I might as well go for the slightly more 'up market' car _b
Yep a manual Q car sounds like fun, but sadly for me the fuhrer doesn't drive manual!
-Andrew
|
|
|
|
Post by threelitre on Feb 18, 2013 22:49:08 GMT
Honda engines somehow have not been very good on fuel compared to the Rover offerings. Our Tourer with the 1.6K stays well below 7l/100km on journey, whilst the same power with a Honda engine in a manual 216 was difficult to get any better than 8l/100km. With the restricted speed limits in the UK the Tourer was close to getting something with a 5 at the front - but 6.3l/100km is not too bad with the A/C running. If you can find an early 90s 416GTi auto - now that would be a good choice. These seem to be better made than the later 400.
|
|
|
|
Post by indianajones on Feb 19, 2013 6:48:57 GMT
Just took a 623 out for a spin, this one is a little bit too tired for us, but the price is fair so not complaining. But it gave me an idea of what the car is like to drive etc and I must say I'm sold on the idea now  Got a 416 to look at on Friday assuming it doesn't sell tomorrow. -Andrew |
|
|
|
Post by Penguin45 on Feb 20, 2013 1:07:14 GMT
Don't be too harsh on the K engined cars, Andrew. The problems are well known, as are the solutions. Typically, they are usually down to lack of preventative maintenance by owners who just can't be bothered. It's actually a torquey and responsive engine when in proper fettle.
Chris.
|
|
|
|
Post by indianajones on Feb 20, 2013 1:39:20 GMT
Yea I've been told that by others aswell, and most of them will have had their head issues sorted by now. Still not keen on the CVT auto boxes though, so will need to look more into the auto options they had.
Also I've been looking at Rover 75's, ok I know it's over my self imposed limit, but worth a look regardless. Better check what the insurance would be like, I'd imagine around $1000-1200pa for full cover.
-Andrew
|
|
|
|
Post by threelitre on Feb 20, 2013 9:54:17 GMT
K-series 1.6 or 1.8 in the sub 75 cars came always with the CVT box - so if you do not want CVT, take the Honda route. The K-series itself should not be the problem, Honda engines have their own range of trouble in hand (i.e. heavy oil consumption on the 1.6 D-series). All of the 200, 400 and 600 series are generally robust cars, with little corrosion poblems (on all centered around the rear arches). How about a Rover 45 2.0V6? That has a 'normal' autobox, but it is probably rare (it certainly is here) and possibly over your limit. The 2 litre T-series is surprisingly economical when used out of town, how about an 820 auto - it should be better on fuel than any Honda engined 600 with automatic. But then the 800 tends to have its own raft of electrical niggles, most of them can be sorted with a soldering iron usually...
|
|
|
|
Post by Nick RS on Feb 20, 2013 22:10:20 GMT
Andrew,
You've obviously got some interesting choices for your modern car. Over here the K series does seem to have a bad rep that may not be fully deserved. When they were new they were well regarded and from my time at Rover in the 90s the only real nightmare version was the 2.5 KV6 fitted into the R800 which from memory was quite thoroughly reworked before going into the 75. I've a number of friends running MGFs as emerging classics and they are all taking the precaution of uprating the head gaskets as they are known to go particularly on 1.8s. As for the 75 I have family experience as my father owned a 2.5 V6 from new in 2001 and it was completely reliable in the ten years he had it. His one big bill was replacing the timing belts which was a big job with his car at the Garage for two days. You need to bear this in mind if you take on V6 R75 but the 2.5 engine and the autobox worked really well for my Dad with lots of easy power and effortless torque; funnily enough his R75 replaced a 623 Auto - another car on your list.
happy hunting - Nick
|
|
