rover's current range - Poor?

[andy stewart]

Does any one else find Rover’s current range pretty poor?

Including MG as well?

I mean what have they got that stands out?

MG ZR 160 – based on a r25 based on a r200 – based on Honda’s left overs
MG TF 160
Rover 25 Gti (MG ZR 160 without the badge)

And if you look at the rivals they all win hands down –

For example the ZR 160 / 25 Gti –

Rivals –

Clio 172 – 2.0 litre engine in a car that weighs the same as a sanitry towel
Civic Type R – 2.0 litre V-tec – Rev happy ballistic engine and great handling
Mini Copper S – 1600 Supercharged engine – looks soft handles and delivers power well

Maybe in same category?? -
Golf R32
Focus RS

Then there’s the MG TF

Rivals –

Honda S2000 – 240 Bhp V-tec Stunner
Vauxhall VX220 Turbo – 2k more and 0-60 in 4 seconds!

And that’s all I can think of off the top of my head.

Why isn’t Rover matching the K 2.0 with the street wise 4 x 4 drive train and a revised platform- therefore putting out a rival that could stand a chance??

I think the ZR is due more than a facelift – every motoring journalist that has ever tested one just compares it to the Rover 200. So how far has rover come in 10 years?? – It looks like not very far!

Can anyone see a car in the range that stands out?

Andy

[al_roverMG]

i am saddened to say it andy but you have hit the nail on the head. MG rover are about to go down the pan for the second time and all because they have become complaciant with the models they have rather than continued development and new models.

At the end of the day most of the xpower (ie sv and ZT260) are out of the reach of most they need main stream development.

[paul220tcoupe]

yea i agree with the statements fully

what we need is another coupe or similar, with a 250bhp engine, that is affordable.

And at least a ZR with 200bhp

[andy stewart]

And at least a ZR with 200bhp

i do remember a ZR 210 being shown at autocar or something similar - the first with the k 2.0 engine!

but is it enough??

[paul220tcoupe]

hmmm well IMO no it wont be.

It will have to be 200bhp and more

something like 240bhp, and thats just to catch up to the rivals. The it will need a whole new chassis so it handles as well if not better than the others, only then will MG Rover start to catch up

There aint no point in there simply matching or copying the rivals cause they will still only be catching up, they need something better, faster and CHEAPER!

[sharky]

There aint no point in there simply matching or copying the rivals cause they will still only be catching up, they need something better, faster and CHEAPER!

and something that jeremy clarkson likes... as IMO, what he says on TV has a huge effect on what other people think.

[Gary]

Why does it need a new chassis?
The only reason i can see a new chassis as useful is if it would enable them to make the car slightly bigger. The car needs a full restyle and a complete interior overhaul, and sort that drivers seat out! No matter what the mags say a lot of people buy cars down to how the look and how well they percieve it performs.

[george_chick]

Why does it need a new chassis?
The only reason i can see a new chassis as useful is if it would enable them to make the car slightly bigger. The car needs a full restyle and a complete interior overhaul, and sort that drivers seat out! No matter what the mags say a lot of people buy cars down to how the look and how well they percieve it performs.

So that it'll handle like its rivals straight out the box/showroom.

If its the old floorpan at least be clued up enough to lie and say its a new floor pan, the idea of buying yeserdays car with a new suit, puts people off.
You need an affordable headline act on par or better than your rivals to get the bodys through the door and buying the boggo models further down the range.

[radddogg]

Can anyone see a car in the range that stands out?

Andy

MG-SV Xpower?

[paul220tcoupe]

That car costs too much, IMO

[Chris220SDi]

...again, why do they need a new chasis? As far as I'm concerned the mk3 200 chasis is still very good, the only thing that needs to be fettled is maybe the suspension parts used and the geometry.

[george_chick]

MG-SV Xpower?

But is not all that, for what it costs bangs per buck buy an Audi RS and run rings round it and bits wont fall off.
Apparently the SV's a design lifted from another manufacturer.

Need something nearer the RS/Cosworth line scary, subtle Q car thats affordable, so they'll actually be seen out on the road, advertising Rover not in showrooms.

[malcolm_durant]

And IMO somehow they veer between bang on and way off the mark with styling.

Think Mk2 200 or 600 (bang on) and compare with the MG SV (has "presence" but looks like a 14 year old's doodling - sorry if I just offended anyone!), the projected Rover TCV (meant to show how the new 45 will look and looks like a Focus viewed through a circus mirror!).

But the biggest issues IMO are:
1. Quality (despite great strides, how often do you read of problems...it takes ages to overcome a bad image and more effort should be made and stupid things like the early KV6's should never happen).
2. Managing public image (recent Watchdog stuff, pensions stuff, Jeremy Clarkson, shutting plants for 3 days, Autocar's ZT blowing up, obviously cheap trim in the CityRover). After all VW's fail just as much as Rovers, but I doubt anyone would believe that...
3. Making cars people want for the right price (why sell the Mk2 400 at Mondeo prices when it's obviously an Escort competitor? Why price the SV at more than £30K???). And where's a 200bhp plus ZS...everyone else seems to be going that way??
4. Not sitting still...how long is it since the MG Z's were launched?? 4 years? What real upgrades have their been to the range? One, the underdeveloped 1.8 ZT turbo (deliberately ignoring the V8 ZT). Then they talk about slapping 1980's Montego style headlights on them.... And to the Rover range...? Well a warmed over Fiat Panda competitor with 1980's Peugeot engines doesn't stack up...
5. After following the thread on the ZR210...why bother selling something that's not all it's cracked up to be..?

Sorry...rant over; in many ways they are actually doing well to still be here given the mess the Govt, BAe and BMW managed to leave them in so I think they deserve a pat on the back...

Malcolm

[MGTurbo]

The problem with the current products is there are simply outdated. The ShittyRover is a joke, the Streetwise has a very limited market, The ZR is a bit small inside but very popular, the ZS is also too old and the interior is just an outdated Honda Civic's, the car handles and stops well but needs more ommph, the highlight of the range is the ZT, fantastic all rounder and now with a V8, proper fast as well. The SV is also very nice but very over-priced.

Gareth

[Sheaf]

I think MG/rover are going for the budget hot hatch category... personally I think their best bet is with a higher power ZS and the new ZT v8. The ZR although a nice looking car is based on a car 8 years old, and isn't exactly inspiring.
The SV looks great but isn't fast enough for the 75k, if it was 50k it would stand a chance, but I'd still buy a Noble if I had that cash...

[GT]

IMHO :

25 - A SUPERMINI, its rivals are the Pug 106, Citroen C2, Honda Jazz, Ford Fiesta etc.. stop pretending its something its not - A CIVIC rival! Its still very good for its interior size in class, and whilst the interior could do with something new, the car overall is very good. Worth noting that its rep for poor handling is well past its best now as anyone who has driven a new one recently will testify. Drivers seat is a matter of opinion, and one that people with recaros are spoilt by :p

This car is based on a shortened R8 platform (Mk2 200 series) which was mainly developed by ROVER, during a partnership. It was the only true collaboration, and resulted in a lot of Honda switchgear being used (and even some engines) but the deisgn of the car was Rovers. Thus, the Mk3 200 was even more so a Rover design, with only the switch-gear and gearbox remaining as Honda parts.

The '25 GTi' was discontinued in July 2001, after a mere 12months on the market. I believe there is also a different gearbox, suspension kit and turning circle on the ZR160 to the 25GTi, add to the different seating, front and rear bumpers, the tinted lights and the rear spoiler, there is more than 'just a badge' difference.

MG ZR competition :

The Cooper 'S' has a mere 162BHP, putting it with only about 5BHP more than the ZR160, its also larger on the outside (in fact its wider than a Golf) and smaller in the inside too. It also weighs more, making the ZR160 more of a match than people think.

The CTR, is a Civic. The 45/ZS is a Civic.... so why pitch the ZR against it? The Jazz sports varient is a better match for size and market, anyone know how good this is? (I dont)

The Clio 172 has a little more power and is now the Clio 182. So MGR have responded. Now we have the ZR210. The downside is the ZR210 costs a little more, but has official manufacturer modification support, and can be taken upto 250. Both of these cars have a 2.016v NASP engine, but the ZR is about £4k more.

The above only caters for the top end of the range, but seeing as most people dont care about anything less than 2litre, it seems pointless mentioning that for about £8k you can get a brand new factory ZR105, thats cheap as chips to insure, and will outperform all other 1.4's let alone a few 1.6's. And that even where this car doesnt have the straight line speed, it is more than capable of keeping much bigger cars on their toes around the twisties if driven properly.

Streetwise - This is as we know is not a 4x4, nor are Rover allowed by contract law to build a 4x4, so thats a dead area. This car does make a lot of sence for city use though. Anti-scratch bumpers, increaced visibility, a decent CAT1 alarm system, loads of space and a roofrack. Its actually uses raised ZR suspension, and is still pretty good to be thrown around roundabouts This car is aimed at the city people, and is against cars like the Polo Fox... again, no matter how good a car it is, no-one here will ever accept it because its not the type of car they're looking for.

There are also the van varients, the Rover Commerce and MG Express. Anyone fancy a 160BHP ZR with less weight, and group 5E insurance? NO? OK then...

So how far has this car come in 10 years? A lot further than the Mini went in 40! Compared with the wood-filled, sloppy handling over-priced mk3 200 that went on sale in 1995, this car is a cracker.

I think the more accurate point of this thread is that people want a mid-range car - something the Mk3 cannot cater for as a supermini. This leaves the 45 range, which cannot be modified to any extend because Honda have Rover by the testicles about it - thanks to B*W p*ssing them off. Leap fprward the RD60 project, a project thats been plauged by TWR crashing and other deals falling through. Now this has been taken in-house. This car is rumoured to come in the 7 different body styles you all want.

BUT to get this finished, they need cash. To get cash, they must sell lots of CityRovers and stop people buying Suzuki Wagon-Rs! This car will never appeal to those interested in sports, but if a Vauxhall Agilla was going to be your next car, it might be worth a look!

MG TF - A massive revision over the old MGF. The whole front and rear sub-frames have been re-designed and the Hydragas suspension system has been scrapped in favour of some zed-style springs and dampeners. The read wings have been redesigned to aid with the cooling of the enignes, the front lights and both bumpers are massivley different. It has a choice of 1.6 or 1.8 or 1.8VVC Mid engined-RWD with an almost perfect 50/50 weight distribution. Try comparing this against the MX-5 or Street Ka, 206 CC and you will see how good it is. Dont forget the VX220 is a re-badged Lotus Elise, and the Elise uses the same 1.8VVC k-series engine as the MG TF, albeit with a bit of race-tuning The S2000 and Z4 are Boxter territory... the next class up of soft top motoring, tin tops come in different classes, so why cant soft-tops?

In terms of cars that stand out - RWD V8 with 260 BHP and bags of torque for under £30k anyone?

It seems that everyone wants a product that MGR and in fact very few people have ever produced - something with 250BHP, that handles well and costs less than £10K? That just doesnt happen... as for asking them to handle better - has anyone who thinks they dont handle well ever taken on of the MG's on track? Or seen a Focus RS try to pull away from some traffic lights without it twitching all over the place?

The MGZS is rumoured to be getting the K2000, and WSR are producing a 200BHP ZS for MG as a 2.5V6 toca styled car for anyone who wants one.

Sorry for the long post - not aimed to cause arguments with anyone, just just my opinion I dont think Rover can cater for anyone on this forum any more, because MG has taken over the sports wing.

[andy stewart]

IMHO :

25 - A SUPERMINI, its rivals are the Pug 106, Citroen C2, Honda Jazz, Ford Fiesta etc.. stop pretending its something its not - A CIVIC rival! Its still very good for its interior size in class, and whilst the interior could do with something new, the car overall is very good. Worth noting that its rep for poor handling is well past its best now as anyone who has driven a new one recently will testify. Drivers seat is a matter of opinion, and one that people with recaros are spoilt by :p

106 Gti, C2 VTR & VTS

MG ZR competition :

The Cooper 'S' has a mere 162BHP, putting it with only about 5BHP more than the ZR160, its also larger on the outside (in fact its wider than a Golf) and smaller in the inside too. It also weighs more, making the ZR160 more of a match than people think.

The Clio 172 has a little more power and is now the Clio 182. So MGR have responded. Now we have the ZR210. The downside is the ZR210 costs a little more, but has official manufacturer modification support, and can be taken upto 250. Both of these cars have a 2.016v NASP engine, but the ZR is about £4k more.

MG ZR 160 - - - 14,795
Civic Type R - - - 15,353
Clio Sport 182 (new model) - - - 14,613

MG TF - A massive revision over the old MGF. The whole front and rear sub-frames have been re-designed and the Hydragas suspension system has been scrapped in favour of some zed-style springs and dampeners. The read wings have been redesigned to aid with the cooling of the enignes, the front lights and both bumpers are massivley different. It has a choice of 1.6 or 1.8 or 1.8VVC Mid engined-RWD with an almost perfect 50/50 weight distribution. Try comparing this against the MX-5 or Street Ka, 206 CC and you will see how good it is.

MG TF 160 - - - 20, 295
MR 2 Roadster – highest price ! – - - - 18,513
VX 220 Turbo – - - - 25,000

Dont forget the VX220 is a re-badged Lotus Elise, and the Elise uses the same 1.8VVC k-series engine as the MG TF, albeit with a bit of race-tuning

VX 200 Runs 2.2 Vauxhaul Engine
VX 220 Turbo Runs Vauxhal 2.0 Turbo Engine

In terms of cars that stand out - RWD V8 with 260 BHP and bags of torque for under £30k anyone?

Mg ZT 260 - - - 27,995
Jaguar S type V6 S - - - 27,550
Jaguar X – Type 3.0 Sport - - - 26,700
BMW 3 series Saloon - - - 18,940 – 29,500 (sports)

MG ZT 260 SE - - - 32,750
Jaguar S Type 3.0 Sport - - -30,700
BMW 530i (saloon) - - - 31,055



It's also the way the cars just don't compete with what is out there at the moment - price and quality.

Not just the sport ones, but every model rover make you can find a better one, normally at a lower price as well!

Just my opinion tho...

Andy

[GT]

It's also the way the cars just don't compete with what is out there at the moment - price and quality.

Not just the sport ones, but every model rover make you can find a better one, normally at a lower price as well!

I would have to disagree there, the Rover 25 Impression S (1.4) :

- Driver's airbag
- Perimetric anti-theft alarm with engine Immobiliser with passive arming (CAT1)
- CD player
- Power assisted steering
- Height adjustable steering wheel
- Tinted glass
- 60/40 split folding rear seat
- Electric door mirrors
- Side intrusion beam in doors
- Rear Spoiler
- Body coloured bumpers (206 and similar still get black at range start)
- Body coloured door mirrors
- Fascia stowage shelf
- Rear wash/wipe; auto activation in reverse
- Front door cupholders with CD stowage
- Front door superlocking
- Traffic Master Alert System
- Auxiliary power socket ilo cigar lighter
- Leather steering wheel and gear knob
- 15" alloy wheels
- Mesh finish centre console inserts
- Remote central door locking
- Electric sunroof
- Air conditioning
- Electric front windows
- Front fog lights

Not bad for £9,800![/url]

[mach1rob]

I think the major problem with MG-R at the moment is they just don't have enough cash to do anything with!
Thanks to BAe and those German ******s in Bavaria screwing up a very nice relationship with Honda, Rover just don't have the cash to develop a new car from the ground up themselves. Which is a great shame. Just imagine what the Rover line up might look like if B*W hadn't of got involved ( and nicked the Mini! ) and the Honda/Rover collaboration was still running strong!

[radddogg]

What I don't understand is why Rover don't follow the basic principles of supply and demand. Surely by dropping their prices they will sell more cars and make more money. Then they can afford to bring out new models and sort their future out.

I only got an E in GCSE economics and that was ten years ago but surely that would be better than charging too much money for old rope?

[Gary]

Just because you lower the price dont nesecariliy mean that you increase the profit made. If you lower your selling price below the equilibrium price your profit will go down, even though you are selling more! The problem is we dont know what MGR's overheads are and what profit margins they have set. Also the car market aint a perfect market.

I think MG-R have two big problems and this is the expensive and unflexible work force they employ in this country, and their dating products

Research and Development are very costly, probably one of the reasons why it is expected for their to be very few car companies left within the next 20 years. Theortically only a monopoly has the ability to make supernormal profit and thus plough money back into R&D. In reality i think we will see within the next 10 years an oligopololistic structure within the car world which would be say 4 main players (getting that way now) Oligopolies have their advantages but we will start to see reduced consumer choices but hopefully quality will increase, in reality they can make supernormal profits so can use money for research and development.

Even though in the short term prospects look rosey for MGR, we dont know if things are ok under the surface, bear in mind many companies dont go bankrupt because they are not making a profit but because they are unable to manage their accounts day to day and have no cash flow! Many companies which have been making shed loads of profit have still gone bankrupt.

The lifespan of the current cars wont last for much longer, indeed i agree something needs to be done. The 25 and 45 and their MG counterparts are at maturity, MG are milking them but soon sales will go into decline. Unfortunetly as good as the products are their life span is nearly up in my opinion. MGR did an excellent job of boosting sales in 25's/45's in the form of ZR's/ZS's they read the market right, and their marketing campign was very succesful. They will not be able to do the same again without major changes to the cars.

All of the cars do 'seem' to be priced on the expensive side though, MG-R need to closely look at their productivity as i still hear this is VERY low. The high pound is not helping MGR and the recent selling off of part of Longbridge is more than likely as they plan on winding down operations in the UK and trying to go into joint ventures or a like with other companies (like they have done with TATA).

As much as we hate to admit it, the attitudes and expectancies of our own work force and governments are causing MGR big problems and realistically do you think MGR will survive on their own. I personally dont think so, they need to work with other companies in the long term as they simply do not have (and will most likely never have) the profits and resources to go it alone.

[al_roverMG]

The lifespan of the current cars wont last for much longer, indeed i agree something needs to be done. The 25 and 45 and their MG counterparts are at maturity, MG are milking them but soon sales will go into decline. Unfortunetly as good as the products are their life span is nearly up in my opinion. MGR did an excellent job of boosting sales in 25's/45's in the form of ZR's/ZS's they read the market right, and their marketing campign was very succesful. They will not be able to do the same again without major changes to the cars.

their sales already have gone into decline. You only have to look at the end of last year for that. If MGR dont do something now they are about to dissapear for the second time and i fear this time it could be for good.

Also as a result the second hand value of the MGR range has plumitted. They have lost about 10% off the pre new year price which is greatly more than any other manufacturer.

[Steve B]

Most car manufacturers have seen a decline in sales, in fact there are is one fairly major rival that it is deep do do, and I wouldn't be surprised if they went down the pan before MGR (and yes I am talking about Ford).

MGR do need new cars, but this takes money, hopefully something they have just released with the sale of the land at Longbridge.

The interior of the 25/ZR is still alot better than some of the rivals, in fact when they change it, it will become cheap plastic, and no quality. The 45/ZS interior is a bit dated but it is still a nice interior, again better than some of it's rivals. A new style interior does not mean it will be better.

I just hope they don't make the TCV look car, as this will be the deathknell for the comapny, never before have I seen such a crap piece of car design, it is even worse than the new Vectra FFS.

Steve

[MGJohn]

What puzzles me is when the likes of 'Germany' Clarkson and most of the other media motoring clones incessantly mention things like Rover's dated interiors etc, they rarely say the same about some of the interiors of many competitors' products, which in this humble occasional car consumer's opinion, are quite simply CRAP .... flimsy and crap from both a design and aesthetic point of view too! The fancy curves and shapes of say the latest Ford interiors quite simply have no appeal.... for me. I like to see curves elsewhere ...

Not certain of his directions, I was a passenger 'guide' in a colleague's newish 3 series very recently. True, not a high spec one but I was expecting something better. Had he put his hand over the steering wheel boss, I'd have guessed I was in another run of the mill Ford. Other similar class of car's interiors are no more or less appealing than say any Rover.

MG-R have a massive struggle in front of them. The likes of Clarkson do not help. People like him in a priviledged position have much influence.... after all, if not in so many words, Clarkson says they're crap, must be true......

It is very possible that MG-R will not overcome all the huge problems they face and that has serious implications for even their short term, let alone long term survival. Here, over many years they have had my support. Their products in the eyes of many are not the best around, but, in this observer's opinion, they are good enough for the purpose and at least the equal of some marques more highly regarded.

This incessant and usually unjustified media criticism, be it a simple MG-R news item report often prefaced with something like "Loss making Midlands Car Maker MG Rover ....." ... Oh, forget it ....you must know the rest.

Over many, many years of all this British media negativity, is it any wonder that the average car buyer, many of whom rely on that same media in all its forms for their next new car choice, do not put a Rover on their shopping list. In so doing, many have bought a lesser product as some have discovered when I give them a lift in one of my cars over the years. Be it a work horse Montego 1.6LX we owned for thirteen years, a Monty or Tomcat Turbo, or the new ZS. Nothing really special in that lot but, not a bad car there from any aspect, not least reliabilty!

Please bear in mind my opinions, unlike so many, are not gleaned second or third hand from reading about other peoples experiences, they are all directly from my own experiences and observations during close on 45 years of BMC, BL, ARG and now MG-R ownership.

Finally, what exactly is a new car? The reason I ask is a simple one. I have not personally seen a truly new car since 1959 when Issigonis's Mini I saw for the first time. Meantime, all others since are merely re-arranged tin!........

Safety Fast MotorinG ..... more than just a slogan!

P.S. Why do some contributors feel it necessary to apologise for a 'long' post?

[ADSVVCCOUPE]

why didn't they put the zt 190 engine into the zs 180.
this would have made it even better in the group.

also the zr160 is quoted at doing 0-60 mph in 7.2. this makes it quicker than almost all other 1.8's and half of the 2 litres on the market.

the new pug 206 gti 180 is 20 bhp more and slower on 0-60. 7.4

as for vauxhall to beat the zr160 they needed to turbo a 2 litre engine.
the vauxhall 2.2 16v is less powerfull than my 8 year old design vvc engine. now with 400cc more it ort to be producing 200+ bhp.

so its not all bad

[SubCat001]

I can see where you are coming from Andy. Though I feel your being a little harsh on the current model line up. For example the ZT range. Most Motoring hacks recognise the the FWD's as excellent. I remeber Top Gear even raving about it. The new RWD platform too has met acclaim. EVO mag, which I considir to be the bible, said it was a true drivers car and couldn't fault the package. The ZR too is recognised as being an "old skool" hot hatch.

the reality is that MG-Rover are trying to survive as a high volume manufacturer. This is pretty much unheard of in the modern world. Even Audi of the VaG empire is seeking a collaboration with Maserati to develop a RWD platform.

Rover needs to rethink its line up. They cant survive if they keep trying to compete with the likes of Ford's Focus and there ilk. If MG-R were to realign themselves as Niche, Luxuary & Sports car. I think they could survive.
The line up could look like this:

Rover 75 (Restlyled FWD)
Rover 95 ( Stretched Rwd platform to make a 5 series alternative)
Rover Coupe/Cab (Luxuary coupe and cab based on 75 RWD maybe 5door like P5B)

MG ZR* (Could continue production as a minamilist Hot Hatch)
MG TF (Re-Engineered, KV6? GT coupe? 2+2?)
MG S coupe* (Hardcore sports FWD coupe, based on 45 platform)
MG ZT (Now only RWD)
MG SV
*if demand were sufficent these platforms could be developed
MG-R could also use there network to distribute other Marques that are waiting to break through the UK market.
i also think the above cars would have potential on the US market.
Just my 2p

[GT]

I think there is a demand for a new MG coupe... the MG enthusiast that doesnt want a soft-top or a Rover 45 wants an MGB GT replacement!

In fact, I think this is one of the few brands I think a good Coupe will work for! (Unlike Ford for example).

In terms of struggling competitors... Daewoo failed and met with GM, Fiat Group is also struggling for cash, and MG shafting them for Punto lights didnt help

The PVH dealer network will be used to sell the Tata trucks and vehicles, to help them break into the UK market, so thats more money into the company, and this sell-off and re-leasing of the factory land, aparently releases another £42m in cash for them to put into things like the RD60 project.

Subcat I think has a good line-up, and it stirs recollections that they wanted to shift the 75 VDP (95) to Longbridge at one point...

In terms of the re-sale value... 3yr old ZR105's are still worh £7k, thats still 60% of their purchase value! 8yr old MGF's are still worth £4k(25%?), 10yr old MGRV8's are still worth £12k(50%), 3yr old ZS120s ae still worth £7k (50%)... the hardest hit models are the 160/180/190 because they're so much to insure, people are buying the lower spec ones.

The well advertised factory slowing b4 Christmas is normal, they do it every year, as do many other manufacturers!

Part of the high expense in making the 25/45 is their large % of manual input compared with say, the 75! This should be rectified when the RD60 replaces the 45 as it will used 75 based techniques to automate much of the build in the same way. This will hopefully also see a rise in quality to match the 75.

MGJohn I think has hit some good nails on the head, many people were suprised by my ZR, thinking it was much better than they expected from the broadcasted reputation, something I think many people on here can relate too as used Rover drivers!

ps) I apologise for a long post, because not everyone likes to read a short-essay at this time in the morning

[roverspeed]

some excellent points there, i really would like to see a line up to fill a niche market, imo mg-r have the passion of the more niche car makers rather than that of ford/gm group.

imo vauxhall make cars to sell cars,

mg-r make cars because they love making cars and their cars should reflect that, unfortunately they cannot because they are just trying to stay afloat,this is best shown by the cityrover.

two fields rover should move into, luxury and sports, stick to what they are good at!

bring the prestiege back to the badges!

Warren

PS was there talk of a hardtop tf???

[GT]

There's been talk of one for years... the 'exclusive' derived by Auto Distress was another photo-bodge attempt of a normal TF with a hardtop fitted and some lines smoothed.