Conference terri::cars_uk

Hi,

I've been looking at reviews of the new Rover 200 series, and it all looks
very favourable. A guy on our road looks like he has swapped his 5 Turbo
for one! I must have a chat with him.

Has anyone got one yet? What are they like?

Mark.

    
    Re .31
    
    Probably couldn't handle all the power of a Renault 5 Turbo :^)
    
    Still, maybe the 220 GTi will be worth a look.
    
    Mark

I'd be interested to see how the new Rover 200 series stacks up as an enjoyable
car to drive. I'm faced with this dilemma that whilst 2 litre Cavaliers and
Astra GTE's (Calibra's?) are fast, handle pretty well, and are very comfortable.
A friend of mine recently "grew up", and got a Cavalier 2.0i to replace his
Nova SR.

They are nowhere near as much fun to drive. The steering doesn't have the
"direct" responsive feel to it that my current car has.

I'm hoping that a fastish Rover might be better to drive than the GM cars.

Mark.

    
    Well, most of the articles I've read rate the Rovers as pretty good
    driver's cars (one magazine rated the 1.4 GSi as a better driver's
    car than the XR2i they were testing!), and a friend of mine who
    has test driven one was highly impressed (but then he drives a 
    Montego normally, so his perception of driver appeal will be
    different to yours).
    
    Chances are you'll be hard pressed to find a car which is as much
    fun to drive as the Renault 5GTT (perhaps a Lancia Delta HF
    Integrale?), so unless you stick with the same car (or something
    similar) you're going to have to compromise in some respect and
    the most likely area is sheer excitment.
    
    Finally, my experience of Rover PAS (on an 820) was horrible. Even
    Mandy's sister (whose Husband's car it was, and knows so much about
    cars that she rates then by colour!) complained about the lack of
    feel. Of course, this may not be such a problem on the 200s, but
    if you don't like the PAS on Cavaliers (which I think is very good
    as PAS goes), then the Rover's is going to need to be very good
    indeed.
    
    Mark 
    

I tried an automatic Rover 820, and I didn't mind the feel too much. It seemed
to be on a par with Astra GTE 16V or Cavalier.

The worst power steering I tried was a short journey driving a Merc 190E. It
felt awful!

Mark.

    
    Maybe the 820 I tried had bad steering (It was an early one). Certainly
    the feel of my father's Cavalier CDi is MUCH better than the 820
    I tried, with the feeling only being noticeably light at parking
    speeds.
    
    Mark

   I've had the opportunity to try two "samples" of the new Rover 214SLi
   over the last week, one a hire car in which I did about 600 miles
   and the other a friend's new company car. I had given some serious
   consideration to leasing one of these next, because I like the shape
   of the car and the 1.4 engine is good news on the tax front. 

   After a week of use, I've decided I will certainly not be getting the 
   1.4 version.
   (and this was before I found out that Rover are recalling several hundred
   cars to replace the engines). 


   Likes:

   Pleasant shape
   Good feel to steering on the move
   Cornering ability
   Revvy engine
   Best driven hard
   Precise gearchange
   Close ratio box.


   Dislikes:

   Rattles and leaks from sunroof because of incorrect fitment.
   Rattles from rear luggage cover.
   Bits of trim lying in drivers footwell.
   General poor build quality.
   Clock did not work.
   Overspray on front wing.

   Driving position only suitable for small drivers.
   Poor headroom.
   Seatbelt too short.

   Engine cacophany between 3250 - 4000 rpm (65 - 80mph)
   Engine noisy over 4000rpm.
   Engine gutless at less than 2000rpm.
   General noise level too high when accelerating.
   Fuel cut-off on deceleration leads to kangaroo ride.

   Gearbox would crunch if 2nd gear was engaged at over 4000rpm.
   Having to use first gear to pull away at speeds less than 10mph.

   Steering very heavy when parking.
   Suspension skitish over bumps.
   Badly affected by sidewinds.

   Mirror adjustment switch in silly position.


   Quote from the motoring press:

   "If there were any doubts about Rover's ability to design a decent
   engine, the new K-series of the 214 immediately quash them. Basically
   its a beauty. Ultimately it does lack a little low down flexibility
   but never to the stage of criticism. At the other end of the scale it
   revs sweetly all the way to its 6700rpm cut-out and that hasn't been
   said about a British massed produced engine for a long time. Not only
   is the Rover engine more powerful than the rest, even the 1.6 models,
   its quieter, more economical and in terms of smoothness in a
   different stratosphere"


   The journalist who wrote this was either drunk or had been bribed. It
   is so far from the truth I wonder if the writer even sat in the car,
   let alone started it. 

   Just looking at the BHP/Torque figures would give the impression of
   a powerful engine (95bhp/91 lbft), but its peformance figures in 3rd,
   4th and fifth in measured increments from 30 - 70 mph are worse than
   a Tipo 1.6, Escort 1.4, Renault 1.4, and Astra 1.6. 

   I've read several less than accurate reviews in the motoring press of
   this car, notably in "What Car" and "Autocar". However, there is a
   review in this months CAR magazine of the 216GSi which is more
   objective. 

    
    Ummm,
    
    I don't think you can judge an engine by the performance figures
    attained in a car. After all I suspect that the Rover is considerably
    heavier than any of the other cars that you mention which have better
    acceleration.
    
    You drive a 2.8 V6 XR4x4 don't you? I don't know what you are comparing
    the engine's flexibility and smoothness with, but no way is a 4
    going to compare with a V6 of twice the capacity.
    
    Maybe AR still suffer from the erratic quality control which so
    typified BL cars (you could get a very good one, or a very bad one),
    as other people I know how've tried the car, rave about it.
    
    Mark 

    Yeah,
    
    I used to lodge with a foreman on the Longbridge Rover 2xx plant, and
    he said that on a scale of 10, Japanese Cars consistently rated say 8.5
    from the factory, whereas Rover's went anywhere from 7 to 9.5. The
    variance seems to be higher.
    
    Still there's no excuse for the faults that you found. All of those
    faults are easily cured. At least Rover are designing cars (with
    Honda's help) that are easy to build!
    
    Mark.

    Your criticsms seem to me, to be more to do with a "Friday afternoon
    car" or two, than the design. My opinion is that the Rover group should
    be given a chance to iron out the bugs.
    If you drive a Sierra, then don't forget, that Ford have had around 8
    years of production to get the Sierra right, I seem to remember the
    views of the motoring press, and public, were alot worse about the
    Sierra when that came out, quote;" Cortina in a Jellymould!" :-)
    
    Carl.

    
�    I don't think you can judge an engine by the performance figures
�    attained in a car. After all I suspect that the Rover is considerably
�    heavier than any of the other cars that you mention which have better
�    acceleration.
 
   I quoted the performance figures for a couple of reasons. First so I
   could show why the review was so much codswallop and second because
   the figures backed up my impression that it was not as good as other
   cars I've driven. The fact that the car is heavier means that Rover
   should supply an engine capable of doing the job. The 1.4 in the
   Metro might be fun, but I'm commenting on its suitability in the
   Rover.

      
�    You drive a 2.8 V6 XR4x4 don't you? I don't know what you are comparing
�    the engine's flexibility and smoothness with, but no way is a 4
�    going to compare with a V6 of twice the capacity.
 
    There all lousy compared with mine :-) :-)

   But seriously, the 5GTT, Pug GTi 1.6, Honda 1.4/1.6 are all more
   flexible and a lot less noisy. 

   No excuses, I think they should get it right from the beginning. 

    
    .37......Interesting!...what you say about 214's being recalled
    for engines to be replaced.Dad works for Rover at the panel pressing
    plant in Swindon. He said that they weren't very
    busy with the 200 BUT.....there were long waiting lists for the
    car..mystery!!     Perhaps they have slowed the line down until
    they sort the K engine out.
    Reviews I read in CAR said that the engine was "boomy" from inside
    the car but listening from the outside it was silent. They reckon
    the engine was not properly set up in the car (mountings?), I wonder
    if the 200 was optimised for the Honda 1.6 and Concerto models and
    Rover didn't do enough work on the 'fit' of the K-series?
    Having said that, CAR rated it above Renault 19, Tipo, Astra which
    all had bigger engines but were outperformed by the 200. That's
    all very well but in terms of qualilty, solidity etc, the car to
    beat is the Golf. 
    I've only ever seen 200's in the showrooms but they look very well
    'screwed together'. We don't have them here in France yet
    but I would consider one as my experience of French cars has
    not been good.....If you want rattles and poor build quality
    then buy a Citroen!
    
    

    Being the proud owner of a 214 SLi Rover, I felt I had to stand up in
    its defence over the previous criticisms.
    
    Having clocked up over 4,500 miles, I still find it a pleasure to drive !!!
    
    As for the build quality, apart from one minor detail (the controlling
    rod for the footwell heaters disconnected), it was very high (also
    backed up by someone who works in a bodywork repair shop who asked to
    look around the car as he hadnt seen one 'in the flesh' before !).
    
    I think a major point to remember when talking about the cars
    performance is the fact that is only a 1.4 engine when all said and
    done.  The quote I think summed up the performance from the 214 Rovers
    came from 'WHAT CAR' magazine which stated that '... you will never
    think you are driving a GTI'.  The acceleration, I admit, isnt
    blistering, but then again, it is faster than the standard 1.6 Ford
    Escorts for example.
    
    
    All in all, my impressions of living with the car are very good.  The
    sheer comfort (even though I am 6'1!) and smoothness of the car have 
    left me in no doubt of my choice of car.
    
    
    Shaun (whos not on commission from The Rover Group)

    I'll back up .-1
    
    I had a Rover 214 from Avis for a week.
    
    Not the most blistering performer, but I'd also had a Sierra 1600
    and at least this could maintain it's cruising speed when going
    up a hill which the Sierra couldn't (90mph)
    
    Inside the car was well appointed, build quality was very good,
    and I actually enjoyed driving around in it.
    
    No complaints.
    
    But would I buy one ?
    
    'Fraid not. The performance off the line lets it down in my book
    - but that's all.
    
    T

I'm thinking of getting a Rover 416 GTi or a Rover 216 GSi, as a replacement
for my Renault 5 GTTurbo, which reaches the end of its lease this November.

I really like my car, (especially now its working again!), but hanker for
something different.

Does anyone out there have a Rover 216 or 416 GSi or GTi ?, that I could swap
for a while. It is really difficult to get a test drive of these cars.

Cheers.

Mark.

    I'm just placing an order for the 416 GSi after having a test drive
    with Nias in Newbury. They've got a 216 GSi and a 414 SLi as demo
    car's. 
    
    The 216 has the sports option pack on, i.e. slicker tyres on alloys,
    and power steering.
    
    They also have a 416 GTi you can sit in!. :-)
    
    
    Richard

AutoCars of Swindon have a 416 GSI demo car 

    I recently went and viewed a 4xx, and was dissappointed to find that
    the rear-seat backrests did not have a fold down capability for the odd
    shaped item of luggage (I'm comparing this to the Orion).
    
    I really would prefer a booted car to a hatchback, but I'm not sure
    this will be versatile enough. Any 4xx users care to comment on load
    carrying capability? Can you fit a roof rack?
    
    JK

    I was concerned about this but ordered it anyway as I liked the car so
    much. 
    
    There is a roof rack available, the type with feet and door opening
    grips as the car doesn't have a gutter. A colleague has ordered one
    with this option, costs about �80 to buy the bars, plus more for the
    box frame. 
    
    Richard

    Re: .49: Bit of a rathole - but I'd be interested to know why you
    (or anyone else) would prefer a car with a boot rather than a
    hatchback.  A hatchback is so much more versatile (in fact, for
    me it's essential, having a large canine) - how do you get your rubbish
    up to the tip? :-)
    
    I know some people must prefer boots, or they wouldn't make them, but
    I'd be interested to hear what they (you) see as the benefits.
    
    Jeff.

    OK, I've had my car two weeks (416 GSi), and last weekend I drove back
    from wales through some of the foulest weather I've ever seen. I have
    to say the car is amazing!, no hint of being affected by sidewinds,
    gallons of water on the carriageway or ruts or anyother road
    irregularity.
    
    I also find it superbly comfortable, and the performance is mega. Must
    say too that consumption isn't bad, from last fill, back and forth to
    work, and down to wales and back, (and I wasn't hanging around either)
    I got a respectable 36.6 MPG. (not bad for a 1.6 injection 16 valve).
    
    Richard
    
    p.s. re the stability, two colleagues of mine were recently returning
    from Dover late one night in a hired 214. As they passed something
    burning in a field next to the motorway they hit something on the
    carriageway, and blew both tyres one side. Despite the speed they were
    doing they were able to get over to the hard shuolder and come to a
    stop safely. Turns out the fire was a lorry, and what they hit was a
    section of the safety barrier lying in the road.

    So you probably noticed in 1249.3 that my Rover got modified on
    wednesday. So I took it to the DEC approved repairer, needs new door
    skin as the seam is buckled. Anyway, get in to come back, radio no
    sound!. display dead, radio dead (thuogh you could hear it drive the
    speakers as you switched on and off, so it was getting power)
    
    I went to David Ruskin's and they were good enough to look at it right
    away. So I currently have the top model radio as David Ruskin's didn't
    have the right model and I didn't like their suggestion of leaving it
    there for repair and coming away with nothing. Oh, and I told them
    repair wasn't acceptable, it's less than a month old, I want a new one.
    (I shan't be chasing them up about it though :-) )
    
    Richard

            <<< MARVIN::DISK$TOOLS:[NOTES$LIBRARY]CARS_UK.NOTE;1 >>>
                            -< CARS_UK conference >-
================================================================================
Note 1267.0                    Rover in Reading ??                    No replies
STRIKR::LINDLEY "Strewth mate....."                   7 lines  24-OCT-1990 09:54
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Can someone post the name and 'phone number for the Rover dealer in
    Reading ??
    
    Cheers,
    
    
    John

    
    David Ruskins:
    parts 	64651
    dealership 	669621
    
    Richard

    thanks,
    
    
    John

    John,
    
    I presume you know there's also one in Goring?
    
    JK

    Silly me, of course there is!  John, you dont happen to know what sort
    of a reputation they have by any chance ??
    
    Cheers,
    
    
    John

    Sorry, no recommendations (but their salesman is keen!)

    Another topic mentions a diesel engine for this range.
    
    Anyone know when it might be being launched?
    
    JK
    

    I'm definitely leaning towards a 4xx for my next car. I'm also trying
    to talk myself into believing a 414 would give me adequate
    performance.......
    
    However, I recently drove an Avis 414 and found the engine very, very
    "boomy" around the 3500rpm mark (like 70mph in top!). This has also
    been mentioned in a previous reply. So the question is:
    
    Are all the 1.4s like this, or are there just bad examples? In case the
    Catalyst makes a difference could any replies please which variant has
    been experienced. I guess Avis's has the Cat.
    
    JK

    Has anyone yet had a test drive of the 216 GTi Twin Cam ?
    
    If so, good, bad or indifferent ??
    
    Rich
    

 My Father recently got his 416 GTi, so it is still running in, but first 
impressions are good, the seats are lovely, the build quality very good, and
the engine quick despite the 4000 RPM (red line is 7500ish) limit of running in,
but it is not an all power at the top engine, it will pull happily up a steep
hill in 4th from fairly slow speeds (~30MPH). The handling is also good, 
and comfort is also very good. It will be interesting to see how it does as a 
tow car, but it has been voted tow car of the year, so it should be good. 

		 Alan
		~~~~~~

    
    Well my Rover 216 GTI twin cam is now 6k miles old.
    
    Bad Bits : Suspension has a LOUD clunk when hitting raised/lowered
               drain covers.
             : Water, water every where ! Comming in through the sunroof,
               and up into the boot/spare wheel area.
             : Quite noisey above 3000 rpm (just turn the radio up a tad)
    	     : No alarm as standard
    
    Good Bits : Comfortable
              : Quicker/Faster than my old XR3i (revs to red line in top
                7250 rpm approx 130+) ( On private road of course )
              : Loadsa space in front and back
              : 350 mile petrol range between fill ups (unleaded)
              : Very flexable gearing ( ie will pull from 25 mph in top
                and do 90 mph in third - without going to the red line)
              
    
    Comments: 1. Even though the Rover has height adjustable drivers seat
                 anyone over 5'10 would not have any need for it.
                 ( if you are over 6' then buy something else)
              2. Petrol consumption is not great 28/32 mpg
              3. Why have a wood trim that looks plastic ?
              4. Sound system is excellent though difficult to see what
                 buttons you are pressing when it is dark.
              5. Well made. Ie Doors shut properly, A fly landing on your 
                 bonnet wont dent it - unlike a Ford.             
              6. Flat cap,slippers and pipe come as standard, however the
                 tasselled tarten blanket for rear parcel shelf is an
                 optional extra !!
    	      7. The GTi looks the same as all other 200's except for the
                 rear fin. Even though the fin does not really do anything,
                 it makes it look loads better. (IMO)
    
    
    
    Verdict : Unsure at first, learnt to love it now. 

    to go with .65, here's my impression of the 416 GSi, at 4.3 K miles
    
    Bad Bits 
    >>		: Suspension has a LOUD clunk when hitting raised/lowered
               drain covers.
    agree, when I first heared it I thought the suspension was falling
    apart! I also notice the steering rack clunks as it hits full lock, why
    don't they fit rubber bump stops?.
    
    >>         : Water, water every where ! Comming in through the sunroof,
               and up into the boot/spare wheel area.
    Definitely not, the 416 is as dry as a bone.
    
    >>         : Quite noisey above 3000 rpm (just turn the radio up a tad)
    Not after my diesel it isn't! but I must admit it seems noisier at
    motorway speeds than when I tested one. Maybe I'm just getting used to
    it.
    
    In addition
    
    o	Sun roof blind rattles sometimes, it could do with more stiffening.
    
    o	Wish the central locking could be worked from the passengers door
    	not just the drivers.
    
    
    
    Good Bits 
    >>         : Comfortable
    very, love the leather seats I had as an optional extra.
    
    >>          : Quicker/Faster than my old XR3i (revs to red line in top
                7250 rpm approx 130+) ( On private road of course )
    Very fast, particularly if you use the revs available
    
    >>          : Loadsa space in front and back
    agree, very roomy, as much as the BX
    
              : 350 mile petrol range between fill ups (unleaded)
    You must be gentle or go closer to empty than me, best I can manage is
    300 miles
    
              : Very flexable gearing ( ie will pull from 25 mph in top
                and do 90 mph in third - without going to the red line)
    Agree, I can drive it like the old diesels i.e. rarely change out of
    fifth.          
    
    
    Comments: 1. Even though the Rover has height adjustable drivers seat
                 anyone over 5'10 would not have any need for it.
                 ( if you are over 6' then buy something else)
    I agree, I'm only 5' 8" and my hair occasionally touches the roof
    lining (when I need a cut)
    
              2. Petrol consumption is not great 28/32 mpg
    How does this match 350 miles to a tank?. I get 30 -36 MPG
    
              3. Why have a wood trim that looks plastic ?
    I noticed this on one I had on hire, but mine looks the genuine
    article, so perhaps quality of appearance is the variable?
    
              4. Sound system is excellent though difficult to see what
                 buttons you are pressing when it is dark.
    The standard R670 I had sounded poor, but the R681 they replaced it
    with is much superior. Isn't your's lit?, mine is sufficiently for me
    to know where everything is.
    
              5. Well made. Ie Doors shut properly, A fly landing on your 
                 bonnet wont dent it - unlike a Ford.             
    Nice, but occasional poor fitting of parts needed correcting. (e.g.
    linig of boot not properly clipped in all the way round) I Like the
    quite murmur of the central locking, after the loud clunk of the BX
    
              6. Flat cap,slippers and pipe come as standard, however the
                 tasselled tarten blanket for rear parcel shelf is an
                 optional extra !!
    Naw, most seem to driven by the upwardly mobile (how come I've got one
    then :-) )
    
    	      7. The GTi looks the same as all other 200's except for the
                 rear fin. Even though the fin does not really do anything,
                 it makes it look loads better. (IMO)
    Can't comment, I've got the more refined looking (and larger) boot.
    Though I had to forgo the folding rear seats in consequence.
    
    
    
    Verdict : Love it, but still feel a tinge of conscience about the
    consumption after 5 years of diesel.
    
    Richard

    Had a 416 from Mavis last week.
    
    Very impressed.
    
    Didn't feel very fast or willing in fourth and fifth, but first three
    gears were brilliant ! Very free revving, and even got caught out by
    the rev limiter once because it was still pulling so well.
    
    Mem'sahib wasn't impressed with the 'plastic' veneer either, but she
    was raised by a father who didn't consider anything other than a Mk 9 Jaguar
    as a proper car.  :-)
    
    Would consider this as personal transport if I was in the market for a
    'family' saloon.
    
    AmS
    
    On an aside, Avis now stick car-phones in their 416's and up. Extremely
    bad news for gadget fiends like me - at 85p per unit, and 5 units for
    the shortest possible call. e.g. "'Ere i've got a car-phone - call me
    back"

>>               -< 2 series, 4 series, something germanic here ? >-
    
    Rover are definitely aiming at the German manufacturers with the 200 
    and 400s. Whether they achieve it or not only time will tell. The 200s
    aren't old enough to have a reputation for reliability yet, although
    I've not heard of them being UNreliable and that's much easier a
    reputation to achieve!
    
    Aren't BMW planning a 4 series coupe (based on the new 3) soon? How
    will this fit with Rover? Could we see 414, 416 (Rover), 420, 425
    (BMW)? There was talk of a rover 220, what if they put it in the 400
    could we see two 420s on the road at once?
    
    Confusing, or is that the intention? Just mention that you own a 416
    or a 214 and many people would think of BMW immediately.
    
    Mark (Decisions, decisions, but maybe I'll get an ever better deal once
    the Renault has an MOT and a 36k service.)

>    Comments: 1. Even though the Rover has height adjustable drivers seat
>                anyone over 5'10 would not have any need for it.
>                ( if you are over 6' then buy something else)


At 6'2", I have no real complaints about the room available in my 214.

So, if you're interested, and tall, try it before dismissing it!


Mike

    I've just driven a 214 GSi.  In most respects a very very nice car.  At
    5' 11'' it is a very tight squeeze for me - I do tend sit fairly
    upright.  A height adjustable that seat won't go low enough for
    many people seems a silly flaw.  Maybe garages could modify the divers
    seat?
    
    My only other comment is that it is just as noisy as my old 16V Golf
    used to be.  Due to a change on job I now do 30,000 to 35,000 miles a 
    year so this is an important factor for me, infact it was the primary 
    reason for my changing the Golf as soon as I could.

Re: .69, .70

It all depends on where your height is.  If you have long legs you will
most likely have few problems, but if your body is where the length is,
then you may find you are short of headroom.

jb

    
    I've a 416 GSi on hire whilst my lease car is being repaired...
    
    I've had it three weeks now and when I got it there were 1700 miles
    on the clock..
    
    What I don't like...
    
    Having to sit with a permanent slight crook in my neck 'cos there aint
    enough room for me to sit upright
    The leaky sun roof
    The leccy windows that work when they feel like it
    Some of the dashboard lights that work when they feel like it
    
    What I do like...
    
    It's a smashing car to drive with the 16v engine, very responsive and
    sticks to the road like *******
    Fairly big boot
    Low bonnet so great forward view.
    
    I left this car standing over the weekend and it had to be jump started
    yesterday - the battery was absolutely flat and I hadn't left any
    lights etc etc on. Strange thing is the clock now works - it didn't
    before !!
    
    Overall I'm getting about 38 to the gallon
    
    If they made a hatchback version of the 416 with an adjuster to make
    the drivers seat lower than it currently goes I'd think about one on
    the lease scheme.
    
    Rich
    

    
    > If they made a hatchback version of the 416 with an adjuster to make
    > the drivers seat lower than it currently goes I'd think about one on
    > the lease scheme.
    
    Isn't the 216 just that?
    
    Mark

    But isn't the 216 bodyshell smaller ??
    
    Rich
    

    The seat height adjuster only RAISES the seat. It doesn't lower
    it. This car is particularly bad for headroom, as is the new shape
    Escort.
    
    - Roy

>    The seat height adjuster only RAISES the seat. It doesn't lower
>    it...
       	
       'Struth!  Now there's a design fault!

       Warning to all Rover owners, don't raise the seat unless it's 
       absolutely necessary.   :-)

       Ian.

    To clarify the previous comment, the seat height adjustment only
    raises and lowers the seat from the 'normal' position, as do most
    height adjusters.
    
    - Roy (You certainly have dot your 'i's and cross your 't's to avoid
           sarcasm in these note files :-) )

    Re -1
    >>   (You certainly have dot your 'i's and cross your 't's to avoid
    >>       sarcasm in these note files :-) )
    
    
    Sorry Roy, but I couldn't resist it.  Well I could, but things seem a
    bit quiet in here lately - where's everyone gone???
    
    Ian.

>>  <<< Note 793.74 by VOGON::MORGAN "What part of NO don't you understand?" >>>
>>                                -< Smaller ?? >-

>>    But isn't the 216 bodyshell smaller ??

    Only the length beyond the back wheels. Hence a slightly shorter boot. 
    However, the measurements up to the rear seat backs are all the same.
    
    Richard
    

	Diesel versions available in April. Several models, using
	Peugeot engines. Main interest likely to be in the turbocharged
	varieties, which provide tolerable performance. Methinks they
	will sell well. Rover sees this as a way to increase exports
	since diesel is more popular on the continent.

	-John

    What size diesel?
    
    JK
    

re .81;

It's the Pug 1769ccc Turbo D, as in the BX/205/309/405 etc.

I saw a quick note in the Sunday Times, where the performance wasn't too 
fantastic (Top speed 106, 0-60 in 12 secs, I think), so I guess it's the 
same installation as the 205, i.e., without intercooler, so it's 78 bhp.

WIth the intercooler, you get 90 bhp...

Re several back; about the GTi Twin Cam; I've discovered that Rover
badge the 110 bhp engine as the 216 GTI in the three door body, while the
same engine (with a higher specification) is badged as the 216 GSi in the
five door. The 130 bhp engine is badged as the 216 GTI TWin Cam  in both
bodyshells.

And as  I said before, you get so many extra goodies in the Twin Cam
over the GTi,  you end up getting the extra 20 bhp almost for free,
if you bring the GTi up to the spec of the Twin Cam.

Peter.

	I got my info from the ST too. It said, I think, 4 versions, 1
	NA and three turbocharged. I would guess that this means a whole
	spread of power options, probably similar to that available in
	Peugeot/Citroen cars.

	-John

    Towing data for 416:
    
    Model		Max Towing Weight	Tow Hitch	Roof Rack
    			(2-up)			Down Load	Load
    
    GSi & GTi		1000kg(2205lb)		50kg(110lb)	75kg(165lb)
    			^
    			Automatics require an optional oil cooler
    
    JK

    
>>	Very good car. Will Hertz or PHH let me race it?

        Why should the lease 'rules' be any different from the Maestro? :-)
                             
    
    

    Given yesterdays budget the new 200/400 turbo diesels certainly look at
    good choice on the lease scheme.
    
    Rich
    

    �200/400 turbo diesels 
    
    When are these available ? ideas on prices ?
    
    - roy

    Or the 214/414s - save #150 - #240 on car tax if you do 2500 miles on
    business.
    
    Steve

    I have a friendly rodent who owns a 416gti, and who doesn't seem to
    have a manual for it.
    He wants to carry some skis with it.
    He has two questions :
    1) How do you fit a roof rack ? 
    	We pulled the trim strips off his roof, but there didn't seem to be
    	anything underneath to fit a rack to.
    1a) How do you put them back again ? (he he he)
    2)  Can you fold the rear seats down ?
    	There appear to be tabs on the back of the seat, in the boot space,
    	but we couldn't make them do anything. I suggested brute force &
    	ignorance, but was vetoed. :-)
    
    Thanks on behalf of der W�stenspringmaus
    
    Am�d�n
    

 1) My dad has a special roof rack for his, should be available from any Rover
dealer.

 1a) Never tried, try manual, probably available from any Rover dealer

 2) As 1a.


		 Alan
		~~~~~~

    On the 400s, the rear seats do *not* fold down.
    
    Sorry!

    Thanks, that's what I thought - he just couldn't beleive that his 'top
    of the range' Rover didn't have the features of my humble Ford :->
    
    Am�d�n

    >>      <<< Note 793.96 by UNTADH::LEWIS "Have Bike, will Ski..." >>>
                                    -< Ta >-

>>    Thanks, that's what I thought - he just couldn't beleive that his 'top
>>    of the range' Rover didn't have the features of my humble Ford :->

    But can you open the sunroof of your humble Ford, without performing
    gyratory contortions (one hand turning one way, above your head, the
    other controlling the steering). 
    
    
    As to the roof rack, you get one that sits on feet on the roof and
    grips inside the door aperture to hold itself on.
    
    Richard
    

    Well,
    	When I had a Ford, I didn't find it too much trouble, half a turn
    one way to tilt, two turns the other to slide back...
    Yes, the very next day we were wandering around the back streets of
    M�nchen, looking for something to eat, and lo and behold, a Mercedes
    sporting the very same apparatus as you have described. Real naff it
    looked to...
    And what about when you want to transport the kitchen sink then, didn't
    mention that, did we ?
    And all that fiddling around with silly little door mounted window
    switches...  ;-)
    Meanwhile, if I want a bit more fresh air, all I have to do is twist my
    right hand ever so slightly :-)
    
    Am�d�n
    (Ex Ford owner ;-( )

Several notes rave about the new 200/400 Rovers. I am considering getting
a 216GSi or GTi 5 door. One question I have is the comfort in the back.
With recent addition to family, my wife and offspring will frequently 
travel at the back. With my current car, an Orion GHIH I, my wife feels
travel sick in the back. Something friends have occasionly complained of when
I have given them a lift. Therefore, the primary concern of my other half
is not getting car sick. She is alright in the front even when I drive hard.

	Dave

ps it not just my driving, a lorry driver friend of mine was rather unwell
after an hour journey down the motorway at a steady 70 mph when sitting in
the back of my previous Orion. 

 Well, we have never had any such problems with the 416GTi, there is plenty of
leg room, and no-one found it a problem on the London-Glasgow trip that my
Dad, brother and a mate went on recently. I beleive that there is less room in
the back of the 216G*i, but that is an easy thing to check.


		 Alan
		~~~~~~

	Ford Ghia versions, I had one once, feature very soft springing
	which has a tendency towards wallowing and car sickness.

	If you get a normal, or sporty spec, model then the springing
	will be harder. More bumps to be felt but less wallowing.

	-John

    I easily get car sick. I cannot travel in the back of the Rover 216 GSi.
    I have no idea why, but I feel terrible after only a couple of miles.
    
    Lisa.
    

    
    I also get car sick, and don't really like being a passenger in any
    car! - but, cars where I can't see out very well, and those with soft
    suspension are definitely the worst.  Since I believe that car sickness
    is as much to do with what the individual likes/dislikes, as with
    'reality', I think the only think to do is to try to get a couple of
    day's test/borrow/hire, and try it out. 
    
    Elaine

    RE: a few back
    
    I took a 4 people to France and back (from Nottingham)
    in my 5 door 216 GTI with no complaints at all. In fact the 6'2"
    passenger in the back commented about how comfortable the car was !
    
    Matt.

Thanks for your responses. Looks like its probably okay. However, will try to
get one on loan and test the wife!!!.
	

	Dave

    I recently drove the 16v 416SLi and i was *very* impressed. What a
    lovely car, nice driving position, enough zip, quiet, posy... ;-)
    
    I actually felt suited to the car straight away - had no problems
    adjusting to it.
    
    The only quibble i have is that the back seem unstable at high speeds.
    I was travelling along the M25 to get to Gatwick at 90-100, and had to
    slow down. I just didn't want to risk the back jumping out too much,
    and causing any accidents. I've spoken to someone else who says that
    his friends 2 series Rover does the same. Is it just too light at the
    back?
    
    Regards,
    
    				Lewis.

    �lovely car, nice driving position, enough zip, quiet, posy... ;-)
    
    With all due respect, I would hardly call the 416SLi "posy".
    The GTI Twin cam maybe, but not the SLi.
    
    - Roy

    
    Re .108
    
    That's a bit hurtful Mr Shelley !
    
     - Has anyone stolen your car recently ???? :-)
    
    Paul

    But Paul, I wasn't slagging off your pride and joy. Be honest the SLi
    is just not posy.
    
    - Roy
    
    PS �Has anyone stolen your car recently ?
       NO just the photo (private joke).

>>                     <<< Note 793.107 by RUTILE::BISHOP >>>
>>    The only quibble i have is that the back seem unstable at high speeds.
>>    I was travelling along the M25 to get to Gatwick at 90-100, and had to
>>    slow down. I just didn't want to risk the back jumping out too much,
>>    and causing any accidents. I've spoken to someone else who says that
>>    his friends 2 series Rover does the same. Is it just too light at the
>>    back?
    
    
    Strange, because I've never found my 416 GSi anything but rock-steady!.
    (maybe this is a hidden extra with the GS spec) much more stable than
    the cavalier I had yesterday on loan.
    
    Richard

    RE: 416 posy.
    
    I said it was posy because its like a nice comfy car (more an executive
    car than a car for a 20 year old) and it i just felt good in it!
    
    RE: last
    
    The back seemed VERY unstable, but maybe it was just very windy... i
    didn't really notice, because i was hacking it along, trying not to be
    late for a plane...!!!!
    
    Regards,
    
    					Lewis.

    My new (3000 miles) 414 SLi seems very stable at the back, but I guess
    it's heavier than the 2xxs......
    
    RE: Back seat sickness. My kids have variously complained of sickness
    in the back of Ford's Orion, Sierra and Sierra Estate. They seem to
    tolerate the Rover much more, but it definitely has a more spacious
    feel for rear seat passengers (and more leg room!).
    
    My worst car for travel sickness was my Ford Capri 3.0 JP Special.
    Great to drive, but 20 minutes in the back and I had raving
    claustrophobia........
    
    I like my new wheels. Nippy enough performance for me in most of
    today's road conditions, excellent road holding, and 35+mpg so far. And
    the cruise control got me to Aberdeen and back safely over Easter.
    
    I do agree that it's not "posey". Not exciting to look at, just
    "smart"!
    
    JK

    
    Has anyone had any trouble with the electrics on their 214, my sister
    seems to be having quite a lot of fun with the central locking, and the
    electric windows - all of which seem to have a mind of their own!
    
    Elaine

    See note 731.20 and following replies
    
    RIch
    

    Miscellaneous comments on my Rover 416:
    
    Wheels
    Anyone changed a wheel on a Rover 200/400?. On mine the cutout in the
    centre of the wheel to take the bearing is a -very- tight fit on the
    bearing. Result is that with all nuts removed wheel still won't budge,
    and needs some hard thumping and rocking to release it. This was both
    fron AND rear.
    
    clutch
    I've been bothering the local garage lately as my clutch was snatching;
    symptoms, plenty of travel above and below the take up area. A narrow
    take up area and a nasty snatch as it engaged. 
    
    last action was to get the rover agent involved in having a test drive.
    I didn't pick it up afterwards, my wife did, and the report was that's
    within tolerance. However, interestingly when I subsequently drove it
    the snatch had vanished!. I've got to ask them what they did.
    
    
    Richard

My central locking bust twice on my 214 SLi. The central locking seemed
to be operated by opening/closing the passenger door


ian

    
    Re .114 - clutch
    
    My 214's had loads of clutch problems... it's been back to the garage
    three times now, always with the same problem. When doing about 70
    MPH, any attempt to accelerate is met with clutch slipping and burning
    smell - the first time I was told it was a leaking oil seal and it took
    nearly two weeks to fix, the second time I was told there was nothing
    wrong, but when I got the car back it had gone and the third time I
    was informed it was a 'known problem' - again a leaky oil seal - this
    time it only took 1 day to fix.
    
    I've also got a problem with the car misting up inside, it's been in a
    couple of times but is still not sorted completely - I had problems
    with the central locking - it stuck every now and then - the garage
    couldn't find any problem so I attacked the drivers side lock with WD40
    and it seems okay now.....
    
    Paul
    
    PS - I've never had the mooing...
    

>>                    <<< Note 793.118 by COMICS::WATTERSON >>>
>>                         -< clutch and other problems >-
    
>>    I've also got a problem with the car misting up inside, it's been in a
>>    couple of times but is still not sorted completely 
    
    A classic symptom of fresh air not coming in from outside. Assuming you
    have got the recirculating lever set to fresh air, check that when you
    operate it you hear the flap (located behind the glove box) cluncking
    open and shut.
        

    Richard

I read (or was it a dream!!) that Rover are putting the
2.0 litre 16v engine from the 820i into a 220GTi some
time this year. Does anyone have any more info on this?


Ian

Yep, its now available. See a dealer for a brochure.

Performance (manufacturer's data) -

0-60 7.9secs      140PS @6000      Torque (NM) 180 @4500

    Rob,
    
    Have you got the brochure? When I went to my dealer very recently, they
    denied the existence of the model, and asked where I had seen it. I
    said it had been publicised in Autocar & Motor, and they said, "The
    trouble is that the press always get hold of these things before we do,
    and we're a franchised dealer".....
    
    I heard that the 220 GTi would be available in July, and then only in
    three-door form: can you confirm whether Rover will be doing a 5-door
    version of the car, like they do with the current 216 GTi TwinCam?
    
    What's Nm in "real money", i.e. lb/ft? Any ideas of the conversion
    factor? (I failed O-level physics :-) )
    
    
    SD

    There is also going to be a 220GTi Turbo with 200BHP!!!
    
    Grant

    � Torque (NM) 180 @4500
    
    � What's Nm in "real money", i.e. lb/ft?
    
    NM = Neuton Meters
    
    Haven't a clue how it converts, anyone else ?
    
    - Roy (aka Rob :-) )

 Well Nm and Lb/ft are totally different. Whereas Nm and Lbf.Ft are equivalent.

 Unfortunately I can't remember what the conversion factor is !


		 Alan	(Mr Pedantic)
 		~~~~~~

Ahhh Gi'day...�

	 A Newton Meter is m�.Kg/s� = Joule = 0.0007374 foot-pounds.

    Doesn't seem  right,  does it? That's what the book says, although it's
    that  bloody  complicated,  I'm  finding  it hard to read.  There's all
    sorts of junk about slugs and poundals as well.

    I suspect there's a mysterious x000 factor in there somewhere, like the
    old calorie and the new Calorie (or Kilocalorie)
        =                   =

>>                      <<< Note 793.122 by SAC::DELANY_S >>>
>>                          -< 220 GTi 5-door, and Nm? >-
>>    Have you got the brochure? When I went to my dealer very recently, they
>>    denied the existence of the model, and asked where I had seen it. I
    
    
    I just got a copy of Catalys last night (the drivers mag produced by
    Rover). In it it publicises the new Rover 220GTi!. (top sped 127 mph,
    0-60 in under 8 secs, and the bonnet has a 'discreet power bulge'
    (their words).
    
    It also talks about their new Information centres, basically shops for
    the brochures, in town centres. The first two are in Leeds and
    READING!. From the picture the Reading one looks like it's in of these
    new malls that have gone up (lots of white facade with red and blue
    bricks, anyone know where this is?).
    
    And I quote..."If you would like a brochure on any of the products
    featured in Rover Update call us free on 0800 521020" 
    
    One line in it gets me...."and the bodywork is fully colour CODED..."
    coded to mean what???. Surely they mean colour keyed, keyed to the
    bodywork colour. A lot of people are getting these two phrases mixed up
    these days!.
    
    Richard
    

    re -1 "Anyone know where it is ?"
    
    Down past Mothercare on Broad Street, it's right on the front of the
    new Mall.
    
    
    Shaz 

Caught a glimpse of a sneal preview of the 200 cabrio in last
weeks A&M. The photos weren't too clear, but here's the info.

2 models available - Spring 1992. 1.4 and 1.6 engines. Based on
3 door model. Prices seem pretty competitive at 12k for the 1.4 and
16k for the 1.6. I think the 1.4 is the 16v i K series engine, but I
didn't really read the article fully. 

Does anyone else have any info on this?


Ian

    Funnily enough CAR magazine (October) has some very clear photos
    and also gives totally different engine sizes to these, they speculate
    that the Cabrio' will use the 1.6 and 2.0 Twin-Cam engines. I thought
    that the Cabrio' looked a bit "Old fashioned" but put that down to it
    being semi-disguised ie. deliberately anonymous looking.
    
    Stevie.

Don't you just hate the Rover 200 adverts on the TV/Radio at the moment!
You know, the "schadenfreude" one, etc...

If they'd run those when I ordered mine, I may have thought twice.



	Ian

    Re .127
    
    The 220 GTI is now available, I have seen two examples, both in British
    Racing Green with red striping. I seem to remember that the front and
    rear bumpers were also green, rather than the usual grey, along with
    the lower bodywork. Is this the colour coding/keying?
    
    The power bulge is a noticable addition to the bonnet but other than
    the above, the car looked like the 216 GTI Twin Cam.
    
    I have had my 216 GTI Twin Cam for a year now and am nearing my third
    service with 17,500 miles. The only fault I have had, is that the speedo
    cable snapped on a trip from Leeds to Newcastle (when I was in Leeds),
    and I did the whole trip using the rev counter.
    
    The car is very satisfactory, powerful, handles very well, comfortable
    etc. I must say it is the best car I have had!
    
    
      				Graham (mine is Green)

    
 >>   
    The car is very satisfactory, powerful, handles very well, comfortable
    etc. I must say it is the best car I have had!
 >>
    
    Glad to hear this ! - we expect to get ours at the beginning of March.
    (Anything will be better than the hired Cavalier we've got at the
    moment...)
    

    I noted (!) a new Rover 200 series 2-door this morning badged as
    "Sprint" (no other model markings).
    
    What model is this? Is it the old GTi, or are Rover going into model
    badging like Ford?
    
    JK

    
    The OLD style 200 series had a model called a Sprint and it was
    deinitely in the Ford 'Calypso' mode of badging (I.e. It meant
    nothing!). AR have been very keen on this kind of badging for years 
    though (there was a Red Hot Metro and a Jet Black Metro, etc, etc).
    
    Mark

    This was "J" reg. and obviously new.
    
    I'm dissapointed with the badging, if that's what it is. I'd been
    thinking that at last Rover had moved on from it's BL days to become
    serious car maker. Following the likes of Ford and GM with the volumes
    of Rover seems a dubious strategy..........
    
    JK

    
    Serious car maker? More like a badge engineering arm of Honda, I'd say.
    
    Mark

    
    The Sprint is the 216 GTi, with a new name. The only difference is the
    price! A collegue at the CSC has just taken delivery of his new
    'Sprint' (company car) for a mere �265 instead of the �1,350 quoted on
    the standard car list on VTX
    
    This is with electric windows, metallic paint, and the RDS stereo as
    extras.
    
    To cap it all, it was delivered with a 216 GTi badeg on the back, not a
    Sprint badge!
    
    Steve.
    

    
    So a Nissan IS a British car? They're made in Britain, do you see them
    as a British car? GM (an American company - Like Digital) sell their
    European models as Vauxhalls in Britain and Opels elsewhere (and
    Holdens in other places), I've no problem with that. Fords are Fords
    wherever you buy 'em.
    
    Rover BUILD cars here (in fact they build Hondas too!), but that hardly
    makes them a SERIOUS car manufacturer. They have little input on the 
    design side (the 3 door 200 being a notable exception) and many major
    components are still shipped in from Japan.
    
    Until Rover show signs of producing their own designs (not just
    facelifted, rebadged Hondas) they will not be a SERIOUS manufacturer.
    
    However, this is not a problem which only Rover have, look at the once
    quirky SAAB - now part of the GM group, Jaguar - sucked into the Ford
    fold (and that never did anyone any good!). Soon there will be very
    few manufacturers of cars left in the world (and a large number of them
    will probably be Japanese!) and a lot of smaller ones who, like Rover,
    will simply assemble local derivatives of their parent's range.
    
    It's sad, but it's a fact.
    
    Mark

Aren't the 800, Metro, Land and Range Rovers, Rover-designed cars?
They're certainly more than just "facelifted Hondas".


	Ian

    re: .139
    
    It is very probable that your Vauxhall (or Opel) Calibra is made in
    
    Finland!
    
    Bet you did not know that!
    
    - Jyri -

    
    Does anybody care about the nationality of their car or is it some
    sort of patriotic nostalga ?
    
    Lets face it, the uk does as well making cars as we do in sport!!

    
    The Metro is a Rover designed car. The 800 is based on the Legend from
    Honda. Land Rover models ARE all British designed, but are Land Rover
    still part of Rover?
    
    Mark

>>>    Honda. Land Rover models ARE all British designed, but are Land Rover
>>>    still part of Rover?
    
    Land Rover are part of Rover Group.

    
    re: .145
    
    > Land Rover are part of Rover Group.
    
    ie. part of British Aerospace.
    
    Mike H.
    

    Re .146
    
    You sure? I didn't think Land Rover UK Ltd had anything to do with
    the Rover/Austin/whatever group these days, any more than Jaguar do.
    I'm pretty sure they were nothing whatsoever to do with the British
    Aerospace deal; certainly their vehicles aren't available to BA
    employees discounted as Rovers etc are.
    
    JJ.

    
    
    Re: .147
    
    I'm pretty sure about the BAe link - though I have a feeling that LR
    may have been severed from Rover before that.
    
    I remember all the usual rubbish about 'synergy' etc. because both LR
    and BAe had strong (military) connects in the middle east.
    
    
    Mike H.
    

    Re last two:
    
    Landrover *ARE* part of the Rover group, it's merely been separated
    out to give it it's own identity (or perhaps it might be sold off at a
    later date ?).
    
    One casualty of this new group identity is that the vehicles which
    everyone knows of as "Landrovers" are now actually called "Defenders"
    A dafter and more confusing marketing strategy than anything even BL
    came up with.
    
    
    Stevie.

    About Landrovers and Defenders -
    
    No worse than ALL-IN-1 whatever or Teamlinks for Windows and Pathworks
    Links.....
    
    Paul

Slightly wrong there (or so I believe).

Landrover have renamed the County to Defender. It is still (called) a Landrover
as in Landrover Defender 90 which was the Landrover County 90. The Landrover
name hasn't been dropped.

Simon

    Re .151
    Are you sure ?
    The way I understood it was that the maunfacturer called LANDROVER made
    three model ranges DEFENDER, DISCOVERY and RANGEROVER - I could be
    wrong, I am quite often :-)
    
    One customers computer operator thinks I work for a company called VAX
    which makes DEC's.......!!!
    
    Pud.

    
    Was that your 216 GTi that was just delivered, Derek?
    
    Mark

    
    this is MITCHELLE.... it may be - it was supposed to come yesterday,
    but Nias messed things up.
    
    Derek hasn't phoned me yet - he may be too busy admiring it! (Is it
    red?)

    
    Yep, Red with a tow bar (even has a red towbar cover!).
    
    Mark

It took him 30 seconds to look it over...then he was off on a joy ride...



...and it's my new silver Nova gleaming out there in the carpark :-)

>>...and it's my new silver Nova gleaming out there in the carpark :-)
    
    But no-one commented on that !
    
    J.R.

>    But no-one commented on that !
    
Yeah I know, but I thought I'd tell you unappreciative lot anyway :-)

    
    I'm sure you'll appreciate it, Jane! :^)
    
    Mark

    
    I saw Derek's car today - very nice indeed.

    I saw the Nova - I thought it looked good - certainly better than the
    red Nova it was next to!!

    
    Re .161
    
    Ah so it WAS your silver Calibra in the car park then!
    
    Mark

    But whose was the Skoda ?
    
    
    Shaun.

>>    But whose was the Skoda ?
    
    Was it a 'Rapid' Coupe - or a Cabriolet - or a saloon ?   ;-)
    
    J.R.

    
    Forget the Skoda, whose is the Alfa Spyder?
    
    Mark

    
    If it's a bright read one with a hard top it and left hand drive it
    were here yesterday in DP.
    
    I drooled a lot.
    
    Rich
    

    Will you lot clear out of Derek and I's topic?
    
    Rover.

>    I saw the Nova - I thought it looked good - certainly better than the
>    red Nova it was next to!!

Yeah, the old and the new :-)


Several people have said to me that (the silver one) is a "pretty" car...

    
    I liked the red one better!
    
    Mark

    re -2
    
    I preffered the Lada !
    
    Shaun
    

>    I liked the red one better!
    

Well, if you like it that much, it's going up to the auction...


:-)


it's all gleamy sparkly now, *all* over...

    
    Re .171
    
    I know. I couldn't believe it was that tatty red thing you used to 
    drive! :^)
    
    Any idea what they cost to insure? :^)
    
    Mark

    
>    I know. I couldn't believe it was that tatty red thing you used to 
>    drive! :^)
    

That was sort of deliberate....a grubby brown/grey (ish) car is a lot harder
to see than a bright red one !


>Any idea what they cost to insure? :^)
    

Last quote I got (out of interest) was �300 ish, that's with full NCD

Anybody seen the new 200 convertable ??
Looks very tasteful, prices approx �14000 for the 1.4 up to �17000 for the 1.6.

Wish I had one for the summer. (sigh)

Matt.

PS 216 gti has now done 35k miles and still as sweet as when it was new.
   ( apart from the occasionally leaky sunroof)

I took my 1.4 SLi for a 36k mile service the other day. I washed it
at the weekend, and noticed that they'd put grease all round the rubber
seal around the sun roof. Is this common practice? It was a right bugger 
to clear off.

As far as I was aware, my sunroof has never leaked.


	Ian

    
    Well, we've had the 216 GTi Twin cam for about 2 weeks now, and we're
    very happy with it. We managed to get the first 500 'running-in' miles
    done within the first week, and last weekend was it's first trip to a
    race meeting - and therefor it's first trip towing. I was very pleased 
    with it (in fact I had to be careful to keep my speed down! ) The only
    problem is that &**&^$ bleeper which comes on when you use the
    indicators while towing!!! I've not had any really bad hills to test it
    on, but the long hills of the A34  between M4 and Oxford were no
    problem - I could easily maintain 50mph just by dropping from 5th to
    4th gear. The visibility isn't too bad while reversing with the trailer.  
    
    The car is not so easy to load as the Maestro, since it is only 3 door,
    but there is more load space. The boot has to be opened from inside the
    car, or with the key from outside, which will be a bit of a pain until
    we remember.
    
    We've now done over 1000 miles, so will be able to be a bit less gentle
    with it, and I think that should be good fun! :-)  
                                                           

re .-1

>    The car is not so easy to load as the Maestro, since it is only 3 door,
>    but there is more load space. The boot has to be opened from inside the
>    car, or with the key from outside, which will be a bit of a pain until
>    we remember.

Hardly a valid criticism of the 216 GTi as it also comes in a 5 door version
with same engine.

	Dave

    
    Does the 5 door have as big a load carrying area with the seats in
    place?
    
    Mark

Is there a performance mod for the 216 GTI ?? (ie chip change )

I am really looking for quicker acceleration rather than faster top end.


Matt.

>>Is there a performance mod for the 216 GTI ?? (ie chip change )

    I'd be surprised if the [atmo] fuel injection mapping on this car
    would show any worthwhile gains from a chip-change type of mod...
    
>>I am really looking for quicker acceleration rather than faster top end.
    
    Lower-profile tyres !   lower gearing = better acceleration
    
    J.R.

I have now seen the 200 convertible in the flesh.

A very nice car with all the standard Rover equipment (electric hood, alloys
and special 'purple' paint job extra).

There are available as 214,216 and 216 gti (not 220).

Also the 216 GTI is now available as the GTA and the only GTI will be the 220.

Matt.

RE: 180

I already have low profile tyres and close ratio gear box. sob,sob

Matt.

Re: .182

> I WILL beat Martins MR2 from the lights

... yes Matt, but in your case the lights will probably be BLUE!!!!

    
    There is a mod which gives the 216 Gti better mid range acceleration.
    
    It's called the 220 Gti! :^)
    
    Mark
    
    

re .179, .180 & .182

Yes, but how low did you go?  Try a set of 175/50x13 Pirelli P7s if you
want to get real low!  I don't know if 13" wheels go with this car, but
look for some 50 series tires.

Dave

    My 416 GSi's done 19.5K miles, but since around 6k miles the clutch has
    had a reduced operating range. i.e. plenty of travel below and above,
    but the travel between first 'bite' and fully engaged is only an inch
    or so.This makes it very tiring to balance in traffic.
    
    Recently it got worse, including juddering sometimes on pulling away.
    The garage claimed 'out of adjustment', then after adjustment, 'they
    all do that, nothing wrong'. 
    
    The man from Hertz is coming to try it this afternoon. 
    
    My colleage with the same model, two months older also has the same
    problem. Does anyone else have it?.
    
    Richard
    

    I notice in VTX it says to test drive a Rover ring a number. Has anyone
    done this? Is it better than going through a dealer ie do you keep the
    car for a day etc?
    
    Cheers,
    
    Greg

    Also can anyone explain the pricing to me?
    
    
    		Rover 216 GTI		Rover 216 GTI Twin Cam
    
    0-60	9.5			8.6
    50-70	9.5			9.1
    PAS		375.00			std
    elec wind	std			std
    elec mirr	std			std
    elec roof	432.69			std
    alloy wls	std			std
    catalyst	std			std
    
    Total 	13562.5			15548.08
    
    Why would anyone buy the twin cam for the extra half second
    performance? Oh, and you get leather bits on the seat.
    
    These trim levels and prices are out of Rover's latest brochure,
    effective from 17th April
    
    
    Greg

    
    I can quite easily explain the pricing. The twin cam is more expensive
    than the single cam version.
    
    Helpfully yours
    
    Chris
    

    
    	RE.187
    		
    	Where abouts on VTX did you see this telephone number?
    
    
    
    	Andy...MUFC... 8-(...The test drive freak......8-)
    

    re .190
    
    In the car fleet news section entitled "Test Drives"
    
    re .189
    
    Crikey! Why didn't I think of that!
    
    Anyone own a 216 GTI who compared it to the 216 GTI TC?
    
    Greg
    

     All 216 models are twin cam.The difference in the GTI models is,the
     3 door has a 130 BHP engine and the 5 door a 116 BHP engine.
     These figures were taken from Autocar.
    
    
               John
    

    
    They've all got 16 valves, but I don't think they've all got twin cams.
    
    We've been round this loop before.
    
    Mark

    The only version of the 200 series with a single cam engine is the base
    214 which only has 8 valves.All other models have 16valve twin cam
    engines.When the 216 GTI was first introduced,Honda would not let Rover
    have the 130 BHP engine and the 216 GTI started with the lower output
    engine.The output of this engine was slightly higher than the 216GSI
    unit.
    
                John
    

    
    I bow to your greater knowledge 
    
    I wondered how the did 16 valves with one cam - I know the Dolomite Sprint 
    managed it, but few others have attempted it. I just thought that Japanese 
    ingenuity had found a way! :^)
    
    Mark

>>    I wondered how the did 16 valves with one cam - I know the Dolomite Sprint 
>>    managed it, but few others have attempted it. I just thought that Japanese 
>>    ingenuity had found a way! :^)
    
    They did with the 216 GSi.  I thought the 216 GSi was renamed to the
    216 GTi with the 130ps version being put in the 216 GTi Twin Cam (as it
    is advertised !).  The Single cam engine produces 115ps, so why would
    the develop a twin cam engine which only developed the same amount of
    power ?
    
    Shaun.
    

    Re: .192 & .194

    There _are_ a few SOHC models. The following is from the rover brochure
    dated June-Oct '91.

    Engine spec		SOHC		DOHC

    			214S		214Si
    			216GTi		214SLi
    			216SLi		214GSi
    					216GTi Twin Cam
    					220GTi Twin Cam

    This clarifies that the 216GTi is single cam.

    Roy
                      

re .188

9.5 - 8.6 does not equal half a second. Also, according to your own list,
the twin cam has PAS and elec roof standard.

Which 216 GTi are you talking about anyway? The 3 or 5 door? The question 
I ask is why do people buy the 220 over the 216 when the performance is
identical. Is it purely for the little bump in the bonnet?


	Ian

    
    The 220 replaced the 216 (in 3 door form, is there a 220 5 door?).
    
    _THAT_ I am sure of! :^)
    
    Mark

>>Which 216 GTi are you talking about anyway? The 3 or 5 door? The question 
>>I ask is why do people buy the 220 over the 216 when the performance is
>>identical. Is it purely for the little bump in the bonnet?
    
    More torque available I would presume.
    
    
    Shaun
    

There is a 3 door and a 5 door 216 GTI 


The 3 door has SOHC 111PS
The 5 door has DOHC 130PS
The 220 twin cam 3 door only has DOHC 140 PS

Greg

    Anyone seen any quotes for the Rover 218 Turbo diesel ?
    
    Paul

    No....why..??

    (It's the mischief hour.......)
    
    Re: .-1 I'm sorry you can't answer "No". If you have seen one you can
    answer "Yes", but if *you* haven't you can't answer No on behalf of the
    rest of us who go to make up the "anyone" in the original question.
    
    Sorry.
    
    JK

    Sorry JK
    
    Revised Answer:  No _I_ haven't....why..??
    
    Hutch

    
    Bl**dy 'ell, I ask a serious question and what happens ????
    
    LARVAE::HUTCHINGS_P replies with his usual wit and humour - that's it,
    I'm going back to football notes, only three months until the season
    starts, still at least the european championships are on next week,
    what about Barnes.... (cont. on page 103)
    
    Paul
    
    (By the way, if anyone does happen to put a quote in for a Rover 218
    turbo diesel, would you be kind enough to post it in here - I may sneak
    the odd look. I'm thinking of getting one when my car's lease expires and
    I'd like to get some idea of the cost - thank you and good night)
                              

    I have had a 130 BHP Rover 216 GTI Twin cam, 5 door, since February
    '91. It has twin exhausts which I believe is tied to the Twin cam
    arangement? The 216 GTI Single cam examples which I have seen, have a
    single exhaust and small spoiler (rather than the wing type aerofoil 
    standard on the twin cam). I always thought that the Single cam 216 GTI
    was a 216 GSI with higher spec but the same engine!   
    
    
    Any further thoughts?
    
    				Graham

Originally the model lineup was simple 
	214 Si		1.4 16v twin cam single point injection
	214 SLi		1.4 16v twin cam single point injection
	214 GSi		1.4 16v	twin cam single point injection
	216 GSi		1.6 16v Single cam multi point injection
	216 GTi		1.6 16v Twin cam multi point injection

Then they added lot's of variants, and, probably by market demand 
produced TWO versions of the GTi:

	216 GTi		    1.6 16v Single cam multi point injection
	216 GTi	(twin cam)  1.6 16v Twin cam multi point injection

Yes you can tell the twin cam by the twin exhaust pipes (but they come 
from the same silencer box so I don't think it's actually twin exhaust.

Since they they've added lower spec 1.4's, pushed the 1.6 Single cam 
down the spec's, and the 400 series mimics most of the range (although I 
think the 416GTi is ONLY twin cam).

Richard (with 416GSi single cam)

Richard

    
    
    I'm sure someone asked this earlier but I don't remember there being a
    straight answer so I'll ask again...
    
    How do you get 16 valves of off one cam, unless it's the same sort of
    design as the old Dolomite Sprint engine?
    
    Cheers,
    
    	MattB
    

Does it really matter?


	Ian

    Strange question!
    
    Of course it doesn't REALLY matter, but it's an interesting bit of
    engineering and I'd like to know how it's done, as well.
    
    Mark

>><<< Note 793.209 by FIZGIG::BIGGINM "Interplanetary� Explorer Extraordinaire!" >>>
>>                            -< How do they do it? >-
>>    How do you get 16 valves of off one cam, unless it's the same sort of
>>    design as the old Dolomite Sprint engine?
    
    Dunno, I've never taken the cam cover off, and Haynes STILL haven't got
    a manual out on the car!.
    
    Richard

    
    Perhaps they have one cam inside the main engine, like a OHV engine
    does, and one cam on top?
    
    Cheers,
    
    	MattB

    My leasemobile is a Rover 414, and I am verypleased with it.
    
    However, when I took it for it's 18,000 mile service, the garage
    informed me that Rover had decreed the 1400cc models didn't need a
    6,000 interval service and that PHH wouldn't pay for it. The garage did
    give the car a quick checkover and found some items that PHH would pay
    for.
    
    Anyway, the 24,000 mile servie was carried out ok, and when 30,000
    miles came I dutifully did not book the car in.
    
    Now, at 33,000 miles the fuel consumption has gone through the floor,
    from 40mpg to around 25mpg, and the car has developed a mis-fire on a
    balanced throttle.
    
    I've booked it in to the garage for investigation, but I wonder if any
    other 1400 drivers have noticed similar problems, or if I should take
    this up with PHH or even Rover?
    
    JK

    On the older 200s/400s, headroom was a problem for even average-height
    drivers. However, I have seen reports in car mags that say "latest cars
    do not seem to suffer from lack of headroom for taller drivers, so
    perhaps Rover have done something here".
    
    Has anyone got a 'recent' 200/400, and/or has there been an increase in
    front headroom in these cars?
    
    
    
    Cheers,
    Stephen

    Sat in one just few months old, still had a problem.  I'm 5'11" and sit
    reasonably upright with slightly bent arms on the steering wheel.  I
    wouldn't have a problem if I drove with straight arms and the seat back
    reclined - but IMHO that's not a good driving position.

    
     I drove a new 214 a couple of weeks ago and it seems to me they have
    cured the headroom problem. It was nothing like the pain in the neck
    of the pre-revision models.
    

    May be they have just moved the problem to their new 800 series!!.... 
    as a "big" car I found that had appallingly bad headroom (almost as bad
    as my English).
    
    Cheers, Chris

    
    
    I had a new  "K" 200 on hire for a day recently I new it was more
    pleasant to drive than previous 200's but I couldn't put my finger on
    it but yes I wasn't doing an impersonation of a hunchback!!
    
    Richard

    
    Rover 216 GTi.
    
    Headroom is OK. Apart from that quite a lousy car.
    
    JN.

    Has anyone any comments on the 220 GTi?  How does it compare to its
    competitors?
    
    ..Craig

     
    Re .220
    
    Why do you say that, Jeff?
    
    All reports I've read are positive and the couple of times I've driven one
    they seemed very nice little cars.
    
    Mark

    CAR magazine tested the 220 GTi (a few issues back) against the Astra
    GSi and Escort RS2000. As I recall the Rover compared very favourably
    (one of the main things that CAR felt was possibly against the car was
    that it didn't advertise itself as much as the other two cars). 
    
    Anyway, you may find that it is possible to get a copy of this
    independant review from your local Rover dealer.
    
    Regards,
    
    STephen

    ... .220 must surely be referring to the Fiesta ?
    
    Stephen... getting ready to duck !

    
    Mark.
    
    The Rover I've had for the past couple of weeks was a 1.6 GTi.
    This is the DOHC bla bla bla.
    
    The car itself is lovely to look at. Alloy wheels with the body
    being a metallic bottle green colour. Almost BRG but not quite.
    
    Its got all the bits such as electric mirrors, front windows and
    tilt and slide sunroof. Remote boot and petrol flap release. Nice 
    radio with four speakers. Height adjustment on the drivers seat
    along with lumbar adjustment as well. Power stearing which is a 
    must as its actually quite a large car for its class. ABS as well
    which BTW made me break out the cycle clips during an emergency
    stop in the wet.
    
    The first thing that I question is the build quality. It just ain't
    put together that well. There are too many rattles for my liking
    and the switch gear quality isn't that good either. You have to reach
    forward to operate the buttons that sit in front of the clocks for
    the sunroof, hazard warning lights et cetera. During a rather hasty
    reduction in speed on the M3 a week ago I almost broke my hand on
    the steering wheel trying to hit the hazard button. Not only that
    but I had to take my eyes of the road for a brief second.
    
    Dare I say it but Ford have the best location for the hazard button,
    right on top of the steering column. Easy to get to and operate without
    having to look down.
    
    The Rover engine or is it a jap engine ? Lots of noise but no go.
    Engine seemed very tappy on the cams. Engine sounded racey at 70
    mph in 5th gear. 5th gear at 70 mph should reduce your RPM to around
    3000, ie cruising.
    
    All in all its a typical British car, in my opinion. I would like
    to drive a 214 Gsi to see what they are like or maybe a 400 series.
    I wouldn't bother with a GTi. Maybe someone could oblige me with
    a drive in a different model ? I don't want to tie them all in 
    to the same brush.
    
    Having said all of the above the car did drive very well in the road
    manners department. I was impressed with its ability on the country
    lane type of road. Very little body roll and confidence in the car
    despite lack of feel through the steering wheel which is to be expected
    from power assistance. The manners of English gentry.
    
    Summary...
    
    Not put together well. Naff plastic on the inside. Engine noisy under
    pull away.
    
    Handles well. Doesn't bounce around all over the place.
    
    JN.
    

    
    Engine IS Japanese. 
    
    Mark

    Jeff,
    
    Do you know if it was the twin cam GTi or the single cam GTi. Both are
    16 valve, but the single cam is supposed to be a bit gutless for a GTi.
    
    Clive
    
    PS - I agree with the sunroof and hazard switches. Means that the
    driver always has to open the sun-roof. Mind you, the Calibra's hazard
    switch isn't in exactly the easiest spot to get to.

    I agree with the comments about the minor switch gear positioning, at
    first this does give a problem , but you soon find you can locate the 
    things easily. However, the sunroof switch location is excellent. You can
    operate the switch whilst maintaining handposition very close to the 
    steering wheel. I'd rather do this than have my hand floating above my
    head !
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    

    I never could work out why most manufacturers put the sunroof switch
    where the manual handle used to be, it can't be very difficult to take
    an extra couple of wires down from the roof.  

    
    Re back a couple.
    
    The engine is indeed a twin cam but its still gutless.
    
    JN.

    
    I presume you are talking about the single point fuel injected engine. 
    Can't comment about this , but the multi-point unit ( although not class
    leading) is still an excellent engine. 
    
    Jonathan
    
    

    
    All 16 valve engines are gutless (with the exception of those with
    turbos and, allegedly, Vtecs).
    
    Mark

    What I don't understand from your comments are
    You say the hazard switch is badly located on the dash, but just behind
    the steering rim, but the ford is better, on the steering column BEHIND
    THE STEERING BOSS! you have to stretch ALL THE WAY ROUND the steering
    wheel to get to this position! (or do you reach through the middle and
    hope you don't have to do any emergency steering?)
    
    Richard

    Re: .233
    
    I would hardly regard the Ford BDA engine as gutless. Nor for that
    matter do I regard my Rover 1.4 engine as gutless.
    
    They do tend to have more torque at low end, so you don't have to rely
    on keeping them revving around the 5k mark to get their performance,
    but engine revs (or loud noise) do not neccessarily equate to "guts".
    
    JK

Re: A few back.

Having done 50k miles in my 216 gti here is my opinion fwiw


216 Gti Build quality

I think the buid quality is excellent, much better than say a ford or
a Vauxhall. 

Performance. Not brilliant, but enough to beat SRI/XR3i 's. You HAVE to
thrash it though. All the power is after 4000 rpm.
(when the twin cam is most efficient ?)

Switch gear. Different posittion to normal (ford/vauxhall) but you get used 
to it and doesnt prove a problem. I always thought the position of
the ford hazard light was crap as you have to reach thro the steering wheel.
The thing I dont like are the electric window switch gear, not very nice,
ford switch gear is better.

Rattles. I think a few back may have got a hire car, which means it would 
have been thrashed and not properly looked after. Mine has a few minor rattles,
but then dont all cars ?

At the end of the day if it was my money I would buy one rather than a 
Ford/Vauxhall equivilent. (Ive had an SRi and XR3i before)

Matt.

    � I would hardly regard the Ford BDA engine as gutless. Nor for that
    � matter do I regard my Rover 1.4 engine as gutless.
    
    I wouldn't rate the 1.4 Rover against Renault's museum piece 1.4 Turbo
    on the 'gut' rating! :^)
    
    � They do tend to have more torque at low end, so you don't have to rely
    � on keeping them revving around the 5k mark to get their performance,
    � but engine revs (or loud noise) do not neccessarily equate to "guts".
    
    What do you mean by they? 16 valve engines? 
    
    Mark

    Yep, 16 valve engines.
    
    No comment on the BDA??
    
    JK

    re .234
>>    You say the hazard switch is badly located on the dash, but just behind
>>   the steering rim, but the ford is better, on the steering column BEHIND
>>    THE STEERING BOSS! you have to stretch ALL THE WAY ROUND the steering
>>   wheel to get to this position! (or do you reach through the middle and
>>    hope you don't have to do any emergency steering?)
  
    
    We ARE talking about Fords here, the wheels are not that big, what do
    you drive ? A bus/HGV/mercedes ?   :-)
    
    On the other hand you could easily reach through the wheel, the
    emegency steering is a non-issue because it's only legal to operate
    hazard flashers when the car is stopped (although I, like most people
    on the motorway use them to alert the dozy b***** behind me that I'm 
    stopping a bit sharpish like). [perhaps I need another :-) ]
    
    Stevie.
    
    What - me wind people up ? never !

    
    No, no comment on the BDA, but they were real screamers! :^)
    
    I'm very suprised, though, that you say 16 valve engines have MORE low
    down torque. It's the LACK of low down torque (even compared with 
    bog standard 8 valve engines) which I meant when I said that all 16v
    engines are gutless! It's also that lack of low down torque which the
    VTEC system is supposed to address. You DO have to keep 16 valve
    engines spinning at high revs to maintain their performance as they
    (even fairly low spec versions) tend to be much peakier in their power
    and torque delivery than 8 valve engines.
    
    Mark
    
    PS The Rover V8's another example of a 16 valve engine which isn't
    gutless! :^)

    Now I'm confused....
    
    I had assumed your reference to 16 valves was to 4 cylinder engines.
    
    A 16-valve V8 should exhibit similar characteristics to an 8 valve four
    cylinder (an 8 valve V8 would probably be a it gutless (-: !!). Now a
    32 valve V8 should be something else.........
    
    JK
    
    

    � Now I'm confused....
    
    That's the idea! :^)
    
    � I had assumed your reference to 16 valves was to 4 cylinder engines.
    
    It was.
    
    � A 16-valve V8 should exhibit similar characteristics to an 8 valve four
    � cylinder (an 8 valve V8 would probably be a it gutless (-: !!). Now a
    � 32 valve V8 should be something else.........
    
    Yep, I was being obtuse, but I would expect a 32 valve V8 to have the
    same 'peaky' performance as a 16 valve 4, albeit less noticeable due to
    the (normally) greater capacity of the engine.
    
    Mark

�    Yep, I was being obtuse, but I would expect a 32 valve V8 to have the
�    same 'peaky' performance as a 16 valve 4, albeit less noticeable due to
�    the (normally) greater capacity of the engine.
    
    One point which you have missed - on the subject of > 4 cylinders - is
    that there are more power strokes (can I say that in here ?  ;-) per rev.
    This results in better torque, as does a long-stroke engine, seeing how
    the piston/con-rod can effect more leverage on the crankshaft...
    
    J.R.

    
    No, I didn't miss it, I didn't understand it! :^) I knew there was SOME
    reason why a 6 or a 8 would be better than a 4, but I couldn't explain
    it! 
    
    Mark

    
    Well I wasn't all that thrilled with the 216 GTi but Autocar
    & Motor said the following.....
    
    FOR
    
    Eager, Honda designed twin-cam engine, beautifully built, cabin 
    design.
    
    AGAINST
    
    A little noisy over long distances, quite expensive.
    
    VERDICT
    
    No longer the best in class, but still a likeable alternative with
    real quality.
    
    
    JN.
    

>>             <<< Note 793.239 by WARNUT::RICE "A human resource" >>>
>>                     -< BTW I also like the Rover 220GTi >-

    re .234
>>>>    You say the hazard switch is badly located on the dash, but just behind
>>>>   the steering rim, but the ford is better, on the steering column BEHIND
>>>>    THE STEERING BOSS! you have to stretch ALL THE WAY ROUND the steering
>>>>   wheel to get to this position! (or do you reach through the middle and
>>>>    hope you don't have to do any emergency steering?)
  
    
>>    We ARE talking about Fords here, the wheels are not that big, what do
>>    you drive ? A bus/HGV/mercedes ?   :-)
    
    No a Rover 416 GSi, and I tried to touch the steering column WITHOUT
    putting my hand THROUGH the steering wheel and I was pressed up against
    the steering wheel. on the other hand I can raise my hand a few inches
    above and forward of my knee and press the hazard switch perfectly on
    the Rover.
    
>>    On the other hand you could easily reach through the wheel, the
>>    emegency steering is a non-issue because it's only legal to operate
>>    hazard flashers when the car is stopped (although I, like most people
>>    on the motorway use them to alert the dozy b***** behind me that I'm 
>>    stopping a bit sharpish like). [perhaps I need another :-) ]
    
    No it isn't (buy a CURRENT highway-code and read it!) It states clearly
    that they may be used in these circumstances. So you DO put your hand
    THROUGH the wheel and have not thought about the safety aspect eh?.
    
    Richard
        
    Stevie.
    
    What - me wind people up ? never !

    

>>    What - me wind people up ? never !

    Re: 1888.1 and the new Rover Coupe.
    
    One of the Car Mags has some sneak preview shots of the new Coupe. The
    discussion included the comment that it might be called a 200 Coupe,
    but it bore little resemblance to the normal 200 models.
    
    When asked if it wasn't just like a Calibra, the Rover person replied
    "No, no, it's much more than that. The Calibra is just a tarted up
    Cavalier!"
    
    (Tee-hee!)
    
    JK

Well that's right isn't it? The Calibra (Turbo excepted) is basically a three-door
Cavalier. The Rover 200 Coup� (or Tomcat) is more than a 200 coup�. It's a
two litre turbocharged, overpriced powerhouse. I don't know what the price
will be, but if Rover stick to their pricing strategy, it'll be overpriced and underspec'd.


Ian

    Not strictly relevant to the topic, but.......
    
    Same Floorpan + Same Wheelbase + Same Mechanicals - Less Doors - Less
    headroom - less rear legroom/seats = Bigger Price.
    
    A Marketing Person's DREAM!
    
    JK
    
    p.s. And the Calibra wasn't the first.
    

    
� Well that's right isn't it? The Calibra (Turbo excepted) is basically a three-door
� Cavalier. 
    
    Turbo included soon.
    
    � The Rover 200 Coup� (or Tomcat) is more than a 200 coup�. It's a
    � two litre turbocharged, overpriced powerhouse. 
    
    Soon a 400(!) turbo will exist, so where's the difference between this and
    the Calibra?
    
    � Same Floorpan + Same Wheelbase + Same Mechanicals - Less Doors - Less
    � headroom - less rear legroom/seats = Bigger Price.
    
    There's not really any less legroom in a Calibra than a Cavalier, it's
    just headroom you loose.
    
    Mark
    
    PS Have those who say a Calibra's a 2 door Cavalier driven one? I can't
    say what exactly, but a GSI Cavalier definitely doesn't drive like a
    Calibra, IMO.
    
    PPS I'm also quite happy to admit I bought the Calibra primarily on its
    looks.

    I've travelled in the back of a Calibra, and if that's the same legroom
    as a Cavalier then my legs had doubled in length or the driver had
    moved his seat to the back.
    
    JK

    
    Must've moved his seat then. I've been in both too, and if there's a
    difference it's very small.
    
    Mark

    I'm surprised Mark that you agree that headroom is worse in a Calibra.
    
    When comparing it the the Cav GSi, the Calibra wins hands down because
    the electric sunroof moves back over the top of the room whereas the
    GSi robs those valuable inches and slides under the roof.
    
    The Calibra is one of the few cars with an elec sunroof that doesn't
    cause me discomfort because of poor headroom.
    
    Roy

    � I'm surprised Mark that you agree that headroom is worse in a Calibra.
    
    I guess the Calibra MUST have less headroom in the front, but my
    agreement applies to the back, where the sweep down and in of the roof
    line restricts headroom a bit (but not uncomfortably so for 2).
    
    Mark

    Is it just me or is the Rover 220 GTi cheaper than the 216GTi in the
    preferred car list?
    
    Greg

re -1

>    Is it just me or is the Rover 220 GTi cheaper than the 216GTi in the
>    preferred car list?

The 216 GTI is a 5 door whereas the 220 GTI only has three!

The actual price of the car is not a clear indication of the lease cost. Take a 
look at the Golf GTis for example. The lease cost is the same for the 3 and 5 
door, but the actual proce of the car new is different. The 5 door costs more.


Ian

    Autocar and motor have a road report on the new 200 coupe Turbo, 197
    BHP, 0-60 in 6.2 and 150 MPH, not bad for 18 Grand list. Its on sale
    this week apparently so anybody renewing their lease mobile get their
    quotes in!!!
    
    
    Regards martin

Is that 197 BHP through the front wheels ?, 'cause if it is I'm goin' to 
laugh out loud. I'm not saying FWD cars can't handle 200ish BHP - Corrado VR6,
Alfa Romeo 164 etc - it's just that 200 _turbocharged_ gee-gees is a different
twist action altogether.

mike.

Aw, come on, how else are the joy-riders going to smoke the tyres!!!!!!!

    
    Apprentley the 220i Turbo has "Torque sensing traction control" which
    in the words of Autocar's Stephen Sutcliffe "..my doubts have been
    shattered. The Torsen system works brilliantly. There's no torque
    steer, no steering tug. Just a smooth, neat geataway, almost (but not
    quite quite) as if the car was four-wheel drive."
    
    Some specs (not measured)
    top speed 150 mph
    0-60   6.2secs
    MPG urban 25.4 56mph - 45.8  75mph - 35.9
    weight 1185Kg
    Power to weight - 168bhp/tonne
    
    Dave
    

Wonder if they'll bring out two versions of the car....

.....single cam, & twin cam (guffaw guffaw)

No but seriously, from what I've seen of it so far, it looks good. Though a
bit of a blatant Calibra pastiche, it should sell well (esp. in B. R. Green).

mike.

    OK so who is putting in a quote for one ?
    
    Roy

    
    Only got a little boot though.
    
    Other than that (and presumably the 6 month/6000 mile service interval)
    it looks absolutely wonderful. Cheap, fast and probably impossible to
    insure! :^)
    
    Mark

Please, Please,

someone put a quote in!

I'm changing my car soon.

Mark

A very nice looking car too ...

How does the price compare with a 

Calibra Turbo ? 

If you're changing your car soon, why not put in a quote yourself?

Ian

    re  .268
    
    There are 3 versions of the new coupe (which has a boot rather than a
    hatch) -
    
    216i    �14k
    
    220i    �16k
    
    220 Turbo  �18k
    
    Roy

    Kevin,
    
    The calibra Turbo is 20,950 but this does not include del charge,
    plates or road tax.
    
    Regards martin

Rover 214 - 40,000 miles.

Yesterday my gearbox went, called RAC, towed to garage.

It gave a crunch or two and then next time I went to change - nothing !

Garage today said the crown wheel is gone/broken and it will be next
 week before they have all the bits and pieces.

Question - what is a crown wheel and what does it do ??                

Tom.

    
    Well if it's like a RWD crown wheel and pinnion setup, it's one of the
    two gears which converts the engines rotation into a rotation in a
    direction which will turn the road wheels.
    
    Basically, it (and the pinnion) are two bevelled gears set at right
    angles to each other.
    
    Mark

    <<< Note 793.214 by VOGON::KAPPLER "Smiths Knoll Automatic - Rising,
    Good." >>>
                          -< Increased service intervals.... >-
    
     

>>>>>>>>>

Note 793.214                   New Rover 200 & 400                    214 of 274
VOGON::KAPPLER "Smiths Knoll Automatic - Rising, Go" 20 lines  25-AUG-1992 10:57
                      -< Increased service intervals.... >-

    Now, at 33,000 miles the fuel consumption has gone through the floor,
    from 40mpg to around 25mpg, and the car has developed a mis-fire on a
    balanced throttle.

    I've booked it in to the garage for investigation, but I wonder if any
    other 1400 drivers have noticed similar problems, or if I should take
    this up with PHH or even Rover?

<<<<<<<<<<<<<

	I,m now getting a similar problem - 45,000 miles on clock - though 
	 not as bad as above.

	What's the cause and did they fix it ok ??

    My 220 arrives tomorrow so I've been thinking about where to locate the
    car phone.
    
    I don't want it in front of the passenger for safety reasons,
    especially as the front passenger seat will be fairly frequently used
    in a forward position.
    
    Is there room behind the handbrake or sideways on in front of the gear
    lever?  Last resort may be on top of the dash, though this may tempt
    someone to nick it (even though it's not a portable).
    
    Anyone got other ideas?

    Clive,
    
    Is this a standard 220 or a 220 Turbo? Either way, I'd be interested in
    your views, but particularly if it's a Turbo! Let me know if you're
    down REO way in the next couple of months.
    
    
    Cheers,
    Stephen

>    Is this a standard 220 or a 220 Turbo? Either way, I'd be interested in
>    your views, but particularly if it's a Turbo! Let me know if you're
>    down REO way in the next couple of months.
    
    I'll call next time I'm in REO.
    
    It's a standard 220 (ie non-Turbo).  BTW the phone's been fitted across
    the central console infront of the gear lever. 
    
    First impressions are very favourable.  Everyone who sees it says how
    far Rover have come.  The interior is especially good.  Coming from a
    BMW I have to say the build quality is very simliar.  Certainly up to
    new 3-series standards, probably better.
    
    The engine (T-16 as opposed to the older M-16) is so torquey.  Pulls
    well from 1500 revs, I'll try lower revs when it's run in.  I find I'm
    using one gear higher than in my 318iS (old style).  The power band is
    very wide, though I've not used max revs yet.  I remember from my road
    test that power goes up to 7000 with real performance starting at 2500.
    
    Whilst not a quiet car, it's little worse than my 318iS and I wouldn't
    describe it as noisey.  Ride is good, better than the 318iS.
    
    Haven't pushed the handling yet, I think it will handle well but
    without huge amounts of grip (only 185/55 15").
    
    A R19 16V would be a touch quicker in a straight line and round bends. 
    The trade off is that the Rover is quieter, rides better and has a
    much wider power band.
    
    All in all, a quality feel to the car with easily useable performance
    that should make it an easy car to drive briskly.  A good combination
    between a hot hatch and a car that is refined enough for a high yearly
    mileage and it only costs #1064 with a decent spec.
    

    Following on from .-1 I've now covered 1,700 miles in my 220 with 1,263
    of that in just four days.
    
    The car's ride is a bit jiggly on motorways, but not too bad.  Ride
    around town is rather better.
    
    The turbo models are often slagged off for lack of feel (steering),
    some of this may be due to the turbo's lsd.  My non-turbo has very
    little self-centering action, I believe this contributes to a slight
    lack of feel.
    
    My only real problem is how to fill the fuel tank.  I've only managed
    to get 8.8 gals (40l) into the 12 gal tank (needle in the red).  The
    narrow filler may be the culprit (it's got a cat) - not letting any air
    in.  Any ideas?

My 214 had this problem. The tank supposedly holds 55 litres,
but even when the needle nearly fell off the red, I could 
only get 45 litres in. Maybe this is a deliberate feature
to stop you runing out of petrol.

	Ian

The main problem I find is the inlet pipe angle. It causes backwash which shuts off 
the pump.

I hold the filler upside-down, with the trigger bit in the corner between the body 
and the flap top. This plus gentle sqeezing usually allows me to put in up to 45 
Ltrs.

Richard

    Thanks for the advice on filling the tank, I'll try the upside down
    method.  I'd love to know how much fuel is in the tank when the needle
    gets to the red, but I don't want to run out of petrol.
    
    BTW, the handling is great.  The back end is very tight, this gives the
    car very good balance.  It will oversteer progressively, this can the
    be staightened out with the throttle.  This is one of the few front
    wheel drives that has entertaining handling.

    Looks like I'll also try the upside down method. Glad to hear the
    handling is so much better than the poor handing of the 214 with its
    understeer and body roll.
    
    Brian

    I second the upsidedown nozzle trick. On my 214 cabrio it also helps to
    put it in as far as it will go (ooh er, sounds a bit rude!), then back off 
    an inch.
    
    Andy

This seems to be a Rover problem across the range. I've had
the same problem with a 214, 213 and Montego. Unless the
nozzle is held upside down, or at least at 2 o'clock, it's
virtually impossible to get more that about 10p of petrol
in at a time. 

No, the 213 and Montego were hire cars!!!!!

Ian

    no problems with the 216
    

    Back to my problem with getting enough fuel into my 220.  I've tried
    using the filler nozzle upside down, this certainly defeats the
    autoshut-off on the pump.  It also deposits fuel over the car.  With
    the restricted filler pipe due to the car having a cat, it's difficult
    to predict when the tank is full.
    
    I suspect that using the fuel nozzle this way allows you to not only
    fill the tank, but also the pipe leading to the tank.  As the tank is
    under the rear seats this pipe is quite long and has a reasonable
    capacity.
    
    I suspect the real problem is that when the fuel guage enters the red,
    there is at least two gallons in the tank.  Does anyone drive past the
    red so the needle is halfway between red and "E"?  
    
    I don't have a petrol can, so I daren't try running the tank dry to find 
    out (never a good idea anyway).

    I've done it once, but not as a rule! It was 11pm, & I'd come off the
    M1 to look for a petrol station in Wakefield & I was panicking a bit
    cos I'd left my can at home. Did about 15 miles in 5th at speeds
    varying from 55mph to 10mph.
    
    Not recommended!
    
    Andy

>    Back to my problem with getting enough fuel into my 220.  I've tried
>    using the filler nozzle upside down, this certainly defeats the
>    autoshut-off on the pump.  It also deposits fuel over the car.  With
>    the restricted filler pipe due to the car having a cat, it's difficult
>    to predict when the tank is full.

I fill my 214 (and previous 213) by half inserting the nozzle, which avoids
any cut-out problems.

I used to think I had the same problem when I found I could only fit 8
gallons in an empty tank, until I forgot to fill up one day and realised
that the car was still moving despite the fact that the needle on the fuel
gauge was noticably on the wrong side of the red!  After which I managed
to get over 10 gallons in...

Chris.

>that the car was still moving despite the fact that the needle on the fuel
>gauge was noticably on the wrong side of the red!  After which I managed
>to get over 10 gallons in...
    
    Great, this is what I wanted to know, how far do you let the needle go,
    ie half way between red and "E"?

    
>    Great, this is what I wanted to know, how far do you let the needle go,
>    ie half way between red and "E"?

All cars are different.  Why don't you put a can of petrol in your boot and run 
your car dry to find out ?

It won't hurt it on a fairly new engine.    It's only when you get accumulated 
muck from your tank being sucked into the filter than problems start.

I often allow it to go about 2mm past the red... but I guess not all fuel
gauges are identically calibrated so I'd take a petrol can before trying
it!

Chris.

>to get over 10 gallons in...

oops, should have said 12 gallons, my litres to gals conversion isn't too
great...

>
>It won't hurt it on a fairly new engine.    It's only when you get accumulated 
>muck from your tank being sucked into the filter than problems start.
>

woah!
my owners manual says never let the petrol run out, something about "the
resultant misfire will destroy the catalyst"

I don't have the manual to hand, but I remember being surprised to see this
as I used to forget to fill my astra frequently!

	cheers,
		Paul~

Ah, you didn't say it had a catalyst....

But then if you destroy the catalyst you would probably improve the performance 
:-)

    Hi,
    
    I have been looking around for a good second hand "people carrier" as
    a replacement for my XR2. We are expecting a baby within a couple of
    months and we need more space, four/five doors etc.. I came across
    a second hand Rover 216 Gsi (May 1992) the other day and I must admit
    I quite liked it. The car had done 25,000 kms and had been well looked
    after. My question is can anyone who has had, or driven a 216 Gsi
    give me their experiences/opinions/things to watch out for etc...
    
    Thanks
    
    Tim

    I bought an H reg rover 216GSI with 11,000 miles on the clock in
    January, I am very pleased with it and have had no problems.  It
    performs better than I expected, my other car is a Escort RS Turbo and
    I don't miss the performance that much although overtaking needs a bit
    more thought in the rover.
    
    On the baby front I have been told that it is worth getting a 4 door as
    it can be hard on the back getting a kid into/out of the back seat of a
    2 door car.
    
    M::P:

    >>  On the baby front I have been told that it is worth getting a 4
    >>  door as it can be hard on the back getting a kid into/out of the 
    >>  back seat of a
    >>  2 door car.
    
    Not if its a soft-top you don't!
    
    Actually, I don't know if thats true, but I'm about to find out when my
    wife & new son come home from hospital
    
    Andy

I recently turned in my leased 214 SLi 5 door and got
a 3 door Calibra. I have not found a problem getting my
20 month old daughter in the back. But the doors are 
huge!!!

Ian

    
    re -2, We had lots of problems with a 2 door cabrio and a baby, no
    space for the pram for one thing. Get something HUGE, We replaced ours
    with the Rover 827 Vitesse and it seems to be a reasonable compromise.
                                                       
      

I think .-3 was referring to the fact you can drop the baby
into the back seat when the roof's down, and pick it out with 
a fishing rod!


	Ian

    Yes, something like that - only there hasn't been a sunny day to try it
    yet!
    
    Andy
    

    re .298
    
    I went ahead and bought it, and am up to now totally satisfied with
    it's performance etc. 
    
    Noticed that a lot of people seem to be fitting the bolt-on 4 series
    radiator-grilles onto their 2 series....here in the Netherlands
    the asking price for once is about a hundred quid, anyone know
    what they cost in U.K. ?
    
    Tim

My local dealer is advertising it for 125 squid plus VAT, fitted.

Richard

How does it work then? Does it just bolt on for show, or is the front of the
car cut away so the grille actually serves a purpose?

	Ian

I looked at the new car: The current has a large gap below the bonnet line, 
filled with a plastic strip that mounts between the headlights. Give the 
original 'grill' line.

The new car this is deleted, and the chrome grill bolts straight on top of the 
current bonnet. There appears to be no changes to the actual bonnet. Very cost 
effective for Rover!.

Shame you'd have to fit modified wings and indicators to get the AUTHENTIC 
look :-)

Richard

    It looks like I'll have to replace the front tyres on my 216 GSi, it
    was fitted with Pirelli P4's (175/65 R14) as standard, in fact the
    rear tyres still have enough tread on them to last for ages. Having
    bought the car second hand it was too late to "rotate" the back with
    the front tyres.
    Having checked the prices of replacement P4's (75 quid a piece here
    in Holland) I more or less decided to opt for an alternative.
    Question: Can anyone recommend a good replacement tyre that will
    combine well with the rear P4's, On past cars that I have owned
    I've always fitted Good Year Eagle NCT's.
    
    Second question: Have Haynes brought out a repair manual on the
    200 series yet ?
    
    Any help appreciated
    
    Tim
                                              

Question 1 My 416GSi is shod with NCT2's I'm happy with them, though I don't 
know the replacement price yet.

2. Yes for the new shape there's now a 214/414 manual and a 216/416 manual. 
I've just got the latter myself.

Richard

    Richard,
    
    Do you mean that your car was fitted with NCT's from new ? If so, I 
    wonder what other makes of tyre they fit at the factory.
    
    Have you got the phone number of Haynes's as I would like to order
    the 216/416 manual. 
    
    Tim

Re 1. Yes from new it had NCT2's

Re 2 No I don't but I'll try to remember to get it tonight (it should be on 
the manual somewhere)

Richard

Haynes address:
Haynes Publishing Group,
Sparkford Nr Yeovil
Somerset
BA22 7JJ

Manual:
1830 Rover 216 & 416 October 1989 to 1992 1590cc

ISBN 1 85010 830 7

Richard

    Thanks Richard
    
    
    Tim

    
    With all this wet weather as of late I've noticed how poorly ventilated
    my 216 Gsi is, as soon as I get in, the windows just steam up and I 
    have to keep the heater fan switched on during short journeys just
    to be able to see where I'm going. I've tried all combinations of
    the heating and ventilation switchgear, including the "air
    recirculation" option but to no avail. 
    
    Is it me or is this a common complaint ?
    
    Tim 

>    With all this wet weather as of late I've noticed how poorly ventilated
>    my 216 Gsi is, as soon as I get in, the windows just steam up and I 

No problems at all with this on my 220.  Mind you I've had other problems (oil 
consumption), new engine being fitted today!  Before anyone makes a comment 
about my driving, it appears to be a manufacturing/assembly problem. 

    >	No problems at all with this on my 220.
    
    Clive,
    
    How have you got your ventilation controls set in order to accomplish
    this great feat ? ;-)
    
    

>    How have you got your ventilation controls set in order to accomplish
>   this great feat ? ;-)

Nothing special, I don't re-circulate the air, this would simply re-circ the 
moisture.  Maybe the vents that allow air out of the car are not clear.

>    With all this wet weather as of late I've noticed how poorly ventilated
>    my 216 Gsi is, as soon as I get in, the windows just steam up and I 
>    have to keep the heater fan switched on during short journeys just
>    to be able to see where I'm going. I've tried all combinations of
>    the heating and ventilation switchgear, including the "air
>    recirculation" option but to no avail. 
>    
>    Is it me or is this a common complaint ?
    
I often have this problem with my 214SLi when there's two or more people
in the car, and the older 213S I had before it suffered a similar problem,
so I guess it's not uncommon.

Don't use the air recirculation setting, as this will only cause the
humidity of the air to gradually increase, which will increase the time
taken to demist.

Chris.

    With two or more in my cabrio in heavy rain, the heater tends not to keep 
    up, the only solutions being:
    
    Wipe all the windows (get lots of smear when dries out)
    
    Chuck everyone else out of the car (loses friends)
    
    Put the roof down (get wet and loses friends)

>    Put the roof down (get wet and loses friends)

it's a bit difficult taking the roof down on mine, although I suppose
the next time I crash it that might happen!

Chris.

    2nd February - first top-down day of 1994!

    
    Andy,
    
    Are we not counting the occasion when you had the roof slashed then?
    
    8^)
    
    Nigel (In Leeds, and it's snowing)
    

    re .322
    Its your fault then is it !
    
    Yesterday I thought, nice day, maybe I will come in on the bike
    tomorrow. I only thought it mind, I didn't dare actually say it in case
    Her up there heard and I would wake to the sound of rain hammering on
    the windows this morning.

"in case Her up there heard"


	Exceedingly puzzled?


				Malcolm.

    re: last
    Hey....doesn't everybody know that God is female?  ...At least that's
    what my sister says....
    
    Brian
    
    

    
    I'd rather laugh with the sinners than cry with the Saints...
    
    Mark

    The good girls go to heaven, but the bad girls go everywhere..

    ...and objects in the rear view mirror may appear closer than they are.

Nobodies crying at present!  Who can tell what the future will bring?

				Malcolm.

    
    I've had my Rover 220 GSi about a month now and it's done about 1300 miles.
    
    Here are some observations.
    
    1) Handling - This is a vast improvement over the Calibra. It goes
    where it's pointed and there's none of the vagueness that the Calibra 
    had when you go around corners. It's not as good as my Renault 5 GT 
    Turbo was, but it's not far off, either. The main problem with the
    handling is the overly light steering. I'm getting used to it, but it
    really shouldn't be as light as it is.
    
    Ride is a bit jiggly on poor surfaces, but that doesn't suprise me at
    all and it's certainly not terrible.
    
    2) Finish - Apart from a difficult to shut glove box, the Rover seems
    extremely well built. The doors shut with a satisfactory clunk and the 
    half leather seats look extremely smart (IMO better than all leather).
    The paintwork is very good quality with no orange peel or rippling (The
    Calibra was also good in this respect). Build-wise (so far), I've no
    complaints about the car at all.
    
    3) Insurance - Just got my renewal for next year, this car is �150 a
    year cheaper to insure than the Calibra.
    
    4) Performance - Performance is good and the wide spread of torque, with
    the car pulling smoothly from right down around 1500 rpm, makes the car
    very easy to drive. Although it'll easily rev to 6500 rpm, you really
    don't need that kind of abuse in this car. This was a big factor in my
    choosing this car over a Renault Clio 16v, so I'm pleased that it seems
    so good.
    
    Top gear, however, is probably a bit short. It gives great 5th gear
    overtaking, but it'd be nicer to have a longer 5th for motorway
    cruising (it only does about 20mph/1000rpm). 
    
    On A roads it's great, with a lot more low down 'punch' inspiring
    greater confidence when overtaking.
    
    5) Economy - A bit of a dissappointment (probably due to the low 5th),
    I've not seen better than 34mpg even when running in at a strict 3000 rpm
    limit. Maybe this'll improve with time.
    
    6) Brakes - These are non-ABS, something which worried me a bit, but the 
    feel is much better than the Calibra's ABS'd brakes and I've not had them
    lock up on me yet. Certainly, they stop the car effectively on wet or
    dry surfaces.
    
    That's about it. Overall, I'm pleased with it so far. I wonder if I'll
    feel as happy in 2 years time?
    
    Mark

>    Top gear, however, is probably a bit short. It gives great 5th gear
>    overtaking, but it'd be nicer to have a longer 5th for motorway
>    cruising (it only does about 20mph/1000rpm). 
    
    I'm not sure what ratio 5th is, I've not seen it specified anywhere.
    
    From my speedo it's anywhere between 21.25 to 22.5 mph/1000 rpm.  This
    is of course from my indicated speed, so 20 may be correct.
    
    The reason I give a range is that after 30 miles on the motorway 4,000
    rpm gives 90 mph, whereas I get only 85 mph when everything is cold.
    
    Maybe the tyres get warm and grow (I've not noticed this on previous
    cars), the pressures are correct BTW. 
    
    Maybe the electronics in the rev counter warm up and give a different
    reading or the mechanics of the speedo do something similar.  
    
    Probably the tyres.

    I always suspect I get this effect too.
    
    Interesting to note Marks' observations on the 220GSi. I certainly miss
    the low end torque that the 5GTT had. I'm hankering after a 2 litre
    Renault 19 16V, with the clutchless gear change that the Clio will
    apparently be getting!
    
    Mark.

    
    Hi,
    
    Have noticed on my '92 216 GSI how much "play" there is on the
    driver's side door lock as of recent, are these things always 
    so flimsy or what ? Is there an easy way to tighten it up ?
    
    Tim
    
     

    It could be that someone's had a go trying to get in ... how much
    'play' are we talking here?!
    
    Dan

    Hi Dan,
    
    I don't think anyone's had a go at getting in, not even the slightest
    bit of damage on the plasticky surround nor the lock itself. 
    When I insert the key in the lock it fits perfectly, it appears
    to me that there is play on the entire lock mechanism, with the key 
    inserted I can wiggle it around about 2mm each way ;-).
    Having noticed this on other Rovers (older than mine) I'm wondering
    whether this is some kind of premature wear.
    
    Tim  

    Hmm. My mum's metro is like this. I shouldn't worry about it. I've
    noticed it on most Rover's with central locking.... but not my old
    Metro I used to have. Maybe it's something to do with this? I dunno..
    
    Dan

    
    Time to replace all four tyres on my '92 216 Gsi, currently fitted
    with Pirelli P4 175/65 R14's. 
    
    I'm looking for suitable replacement tyres and and thinking of
    fitting either NCT 3's or Michelin MXV's, can anyone recommend
    either of these, or perhaps another brand ?
    
    As I'll be replacing all four I'm considering buying a wider size
    of tyre (185/65 R14 ??) as I think this would "look" better.
    Obviously I'll be using the same rims. My question is would this
    have any adverse or even positive effect on handling/fuel consumption
    etc ?
    
    Tim

    
    You'l probably experience a _SMALL_ increase in grip and maybe even in
    fuel consumption (ie it'll get a little worse), but going up 10mm isn't
    going to make a lot of difference.
    
    If you want to alter the feel of the car, I'd suggest you look into
    fitting 195/55 R14s instead. The shorter sidewalls will take some flex
    out of the steering and handling and the wider tyres will add a little
    more grip. I think 195/55s will give you about the same overall
    tyre/wheel diameter, which is important to stop you having to have your
    speedo recalibrated. There's a table for this somewhere in one of the
    tyre notes.
    
    Mark
    
    PS I've got a report on my Rover after a year to post, but suddenly,
    what was a rosy picture, is looking a little black. More to follow...

    re.Bigger tyres
    
    	What size are the rims? 195 might not be a good idea, unless you
    fancy some of the nice alloys Rover fit to other 200/400 series :-)

    
    Dan,
    
    It's certainly worth mentioning, but I doubt the jump from 175 - 195
    will be too much for the rims.
    
    However, you could always contact Rover and/or a 'reputable tyre
    dealer' for advice.
    
    Mark
    
    PS Although, the alloys are nice :^)

    True.
    
    I once knew of a kid in my sixth-form days who reckoned he put 225
    tyres on 6x13 rims.... I've never tried it, so I don't know whether
    that's possible... but it was certainly ******* daft. Still, I guess it
    could only 'improve' his Mk.2 1300 Escort... sad man....
    
    Dan

    
    What about the makes of tyres  ? pls see .341

    Oh yeah, sorry :-p
    
    I have no experience of NCT 3's, or know of anyone who has. MXV's are
    good tyres. To be honest, I think either would be a step up from
    Pirelli P4's. Pirelli's always seem to be awful in the wet (in my
    experience) but then again I had P600's last time......
    
    In summary, I think either will do - they are both acomplished ranges
    of tyres.
    
    Dan

    
    Yep,
    
    Goodyear or Michelin are usually ok. My Rover 220 has Dunlops and they
    seem ok too (although they didn't last all that long on the front
    wheels).
    
    Personally, I like Goodyear's NCT Eagles (the directional ones). They
    greatly improved the handling of my Calibra (over P600s), but the Rover
    handles better to start with. I had MXVs on a Renault 5 GT Turbo and
    that handled brilliantly.
    
    I'd steer clear of Pirelli's performance tyres,too, but the basic ones 
    seem ok on the Fiats we've had.
    
    It's said that Yokohamas are the ultimate for grip, but you pay for
    that in initial cost and limited lifespan. You're probably safe with any
    of the performance Goodyears, Dunlops or Michelins. 
    
    Mark
                                                        

    re. Yoko's
    
    	Yes. These are performance items. I only ever regard them as such,
    although some higher models of Bridgestone's range are supposed to be
    exceptionally good. I tried to get some Bridgestone RE71's for mine
    when I needed tyres, but couldn't get them for love nor money (not sure
    they still make 'em now). So I got some Toyo's instead, and was nicely
    surprised at these obscure Japanese performance tyres. Great in the dry
    but, equally, nice and stable in the wet.
    
    Dan

	I read in a paper somewhere that this model is due for 
	replacement very shortly.

	-John

I've now had my Rover a little over 1 year and it's just had it's 1 year 
(12,000 mile) service at the local German Rover dealer (a place with a showroom
full of XJ220s, Diablos, Bentleys and Bugattis - very nice...)

So, here's a review of my year with a Rover 220 GSi.

Car : ROVER 220 GSi - 3 door hatch.

Mileage : c 12,000	Age : c 13 months

Expenses : FOC - 6 month oil change/check
	   c. �180 for two new winter tyres - original summer tyres had worn
	   around  edges (probably due to underinflation) and a trip into a
	   snow bank convinced me of the virtues of snow tyres!
	   c. �270 for the 12 month service in a German dealers (labour �50 per
			hour!!!). 
			This included some work to fix an oil leak which
			would have been covered by the warranty if I'd had it 
			done before it ran out. However, the leak continued
			and the crankshaft oil seal was replaced. Rover paid
			75% of the initial work and 100% of the crankshaft oil
			seal replacement, even though the car was just out of
			warranty. They certainly _should_ do this, but in my
			experience other manufacturers only _do_ under pressure.
			In this case, the garage did any persuading that was
			neccesary on my behalf. Brownie points to Rover and
			Auto Konig, even if the oil leak did tarnish my view
			of the Rover a little.

	   UK Insurance - �450 (Self and wife driving - wife with an accident 
			  in last 3 years (32/35 years old). Fully comp, 
			  protected NCB.
			  Double the UK figure with a full year's green card...

Likes : handling, build quality, responsiveness.

Dislikes : overly light steering, low gearing (only a dislike in Germany).

Engine/Gearbox : Very torquey, excellent for overtaking, but low gearing makes
Autobahn journies (> 100 mph) less comfortable than they could be (max indicated
speed of 130mph only 500 rpm short of red line)The gearing is well suited to 
A/B roads, however, and is not a major problem at British M-way speeds. Average
MPG, in low to mid 30s, could be better, but the low gearing doesn't help. 

The oil leak, although not serious, was a dissapointing blot on an otherwise 
bright landscape. Hopefully it's now cured and Rover's (and, especially, their 
dealer's) attitude was a lot better than I've encountered from GM or Renault 
in the past.

Handling : The steering is too light, but otherwise handling and ride are very 
good. Car is excellent to drive on twisty mountain roads and on British B-
roads, although it is easy to 'over-steer' the car due to lightness of steering.
I've read criticisms of the car's tendency to be upset by bumps and it's fair
to say the car is a _little_ skittish on bumpy roads, but I don't find it a 
problem. 

Comfort : Seats good (although on long trips your buttocks sometimes go numb - 
has anyone else noticed this?), Stereo good (upgraded from standard), but wind 
noise (especially) and engine noise begin to get intrusive above 100 mph. 
However, my car doesn't seem to have the 70-80 mph boom of the 220GTi I test 
drove.

Quality : Interior and exterior still look good, (especially after the recent
valet by Auto Konigs, done for free when the oil leak was fixed) despite not 
being molly-coddled. Only faults so far have been a hesitant indicator flashing 
which cured itself, the light switch on the driver's door breaking (I think 
this was caused by me opening the door when it was frozen) and the oil leak.
The sticky glove box lid has ceased to be a problem with use. 

The car has been plauged by careless people, including a dent on the first day 
I owned it in the DEC Newbury car park, a gouge out of the front bumper in the 
EDS car park, a wally who put a dent in the rear wing on a car ferry (I saw 
this one and DAS had to them to court over a �140 repair bill!) and now a 
couple of chips in the front bumper paintwork where someone in an Escort 
decided to reverse quickly into the front of my car (One of those I-see-it-but
-I-don't-believe-it situations! I expected the whole front of the car to be 
stoved in, but aside from the tiny paint chips the car was unscathed, unlike 
the Escort's rear bumper!), but otherwise the paintwork and the smart alloys 
still looks good.Contrary to other reports I've heard, my Rover doesn't rattle 
at all and nothing (except the mentioned light switch) has broken or fallen off.

Overall impression : Reliable, comfortable, well-built and enjoyable to drive.
Ideally, I'd dump (or certainly lower the gearing of) the power steering and 
I'd fit a higher 5th gear (no-one _really_ needs rocket acceleration at 90 mph 
in top gear!), but, overall, I'm very happy with it so far. The oil leak was 
a major dissapointment, but probably only because the car has been so good
otherwise. In reality, the leak never got bad enough to be a serious problem 
and Rover and their dealer both exhibited a helpful and positive attitude to 
putting it right.

I've never bought the same model of car twice, but I'd certainly consider a 
Rover again (maybe a 800 Vitesse Sport next time? :^) ), on the strength of my 
experiences so far. 

However, that FIAT coup� looks very interesting in Turbo form :^)

Mark

as my three year lease for the Rover 214 I got on the car scheme has just about
come to an end, so I thought I'd post a brief summary of various pluses and
minuses that have come to light over that time:

first of all, various niggles:

- the gearbox; this is very nasty.  The synchro's don't work properly, it's
  stiff, rubbery and not at all positive, and is prone to making nasty grinding
  noises.  It was not a pleasant experience when one of the gears disintegrated
  whilst I was driving, apparently due to a manufacturing fault.
- the clutch; absolutely diabolical.  Whoever designed this marvel of
  automotive technology should be taken outside and given a good slapping.
  The vibration caused when this thing is engaged is probably the cause of
  the many rattles and squeaks that have built up over the years, and the
  cause of many embarrasing stalls.  Rover says they've redesigned it now.
- seatbelts; these have an annoying tendency to lock when leaning forward to
  see out of a junction, and also don't retract properly, resulting in them
  hanging out from the doors when I get out.
- the radio; a bit primitive, even though it says `RDS'.  Drivers of older
  Cavaliers may be familiar with the clanky and easily broken cassette player!
- drivers seat; not at all supportive, and the creaks drive me nuts!
- wing mirrors; it'd be nice if these didn't break so easily.  Erm...

I'd still say though, that the car's good points far outweigh the irritating
bits:

- engine; this design is wonderful.  Very flexible, powerful and free revving.
  0-60 in 11 seconds is pretty amazing for a 1.4 litre in a car this size!
- reliability; other than the gearbox needing bits replaced (and a new exhaust
  after an excursion across a field.  Oops!) I've had no bother with this car.
- attention to detail; various things Rover seem to have forgotten themselves,
  like the heated wing mirrors etc.
- instruments; very clear, and easy to use.
- loading space; with the rear seats folded down, I've managed to fit a massive
  amount of stuff in this car on several occasions, it's proved its worth as
  a lugger.
- radio; it does actually have some good points, like automatically turning
  the volume down when it's turned on, probably saving several pairs of pants
  from the laundry when I find that on my previous journey I was listening to
  Black Sabbath at 200dB.

So would I buy another one?  If I was buying privately and second hand, yes,
although I'd make sure that it was one of the later ones with the redesigned
clutch and MPFI.  But from the car scheme, the answer's `no', not just because
they're now too expensive for what they offer, but they're also about to
be replaced.  I have, however, enjoyed the last three years with this car,
though I doubt if the car would say the same!  It did make some close friends
in the Welwyn repairers though.

Chris.

    Was it the single point injection engine and, if so, is it the same
    incarnation as in the Metro GTi? (ie. gearbox)
    
    If so, there must have been something off because the gearchange on the
    Metro GTi is fairly sweet, even though I prefer a nice reassuring
    'snick' into gear a l� Ford Xflow/Pinto days....
    
    The clutch was also fine, and this was on a J-reg single point car.
    
    Having said that, I've heard the same niggles about the stereo of
    nearly every Rover 200 owner I've known, so it doesn't surprise me.
    
    The engine, I agree, is a sweetie. Unburstable. A techie guy at Avonbar
    told me the 1.4 K-series will happily take 145bhp and 8000 rpm without
    risking itself any damage.... and the flexibility, well, you've
    discovered that already.
    
    Did you know Ford, before its Zetec days, actually considered buying
    out Rover just for the K-series engine?
    
    Cheers,
    Dan

Well, as far as I'm concerned, the latest Rover 214 is a babe!  I drive one 
whenever I'm back in Swansea, and it's a joy to drive.  I agree about the crap 
Philips stereo - abysmal when compared to competitors - and I agree about the 
engine.  It's got a fair amount of punch considering the car's size, and 
enables you to put other cars with similar engine sizes (e.g.the stodgy Golf 
1.4 CL) to shame.  The seats in my Mother's 214SEi are more supportive than the 
Si or SLi, and the seat belts have a tendency to do the opposite to yours, 
Chris - they nearly slice your ear off as they retract at 200 mph.

Handling is good, and there is negligible body-roll compared to other cars of 
the same size.  I must say that I'm extremely impressed with it, and I'm 
waiting for the new one to come out, so I can snap an "old shape" one up for 
myself.

Matt$impressed

    Indeed. My mother wanted one, but when dad walked into the Rover garage
    and said "I'd like to buy a 214SEi, how much discount will you give for
    cash?" and the guy said "None, Sir." we walked out.
    
    Then after thinking about it, and the car not really being used much,
    dad and myself kinda 'talked' mum into a GTi so that we could have some
    fun at the same time :-) Hahahaha!
    
    "Oh dear, my car's going in for a service... errm... MOTHER!!! I need
    to borrow your car, yup, thanks, cheers, bye.......!"
    
    There is a certain amount of Rover loyalty in our family, I'll admit. I
    had a nice little '88 MG Metro first, and it never gave me one spot of
    serious bother. Ever since, I've liked Rover cars, and the K-series
    powered ones are no exception.... although a 220GTi wouldn't go amiss
    :-).
    
    Cheers,
    Dan

    >   <<< Note 793.355 by FORTY2::HOWELL "Just get to the point..." >>>
    
    >Indeed. My mother wanted one, but when dad walked into the Rover
    >garage and said "I'd like to buy a 214SEi, how much discount will 
    >you give for cash?" and the guy said "None, Sir." we walked out.
    
    From a legal point of view, the salesman is correct. He, or any other
    vendor is not allowed to charge a different price depending on the 
    payment method. He must charge the same price for cash or credit (or
    however you want to pay for it)
    
    There were a few rumbles from petrol stations a while back regarding
    them charging more for credit card sales. This quickly died a death
    when they realised a change in the law would be required before they
    could do so.
    
    POL. 

    
    � them charging more for credit card sales. This quickly died a death
    � when they realised a change in the law would be required before they
    � could do so.
    
    I thought that JUST such a law was passed a couple of years back. Many
    adverts in the computer press list a surcharge for credit card sales,
    but most shops don't charge extra (you'll probably pay the extra if you
    pay by cash!).
    
    Mark
    

    Well, in the end he went through a lease-car friend and got a brand new
    J-reg Metro GTi for �8000.
    
    Rover lost out. Well, that's their fault.
    
    Cheers,
    Dan

    Well, i've just reached the 12,000 mile mark in my 420 GSi Tourer, so I
    thought a brief resum� of the first 6months motoring might be
    interesting.
    
    Things got off to a bad start when the Speedo cable snapped after
    350miles. Unfotunately, this was a factory back-order part which took
    3�weeks (and 2,500miles) to arrive. At the same time one of the heater
    controls gave up the ghost. Apparently the speedo cable was trapped
    between the dashboard and the bulkhead during manufacture and just
    wound itself up to destruction. 
    
    Anyway, all the above were fixed (along with a creaking sunroof) at the
    6,000 mile first service.
    
    Plus points
    ===========
    
    Brilliant engine (2.0 T16)
    Nice bodystyling ( anumber of people have likened it to a BMW touring)
    Nice interior
    Good performance
    Deceptively large amount of load space
    Stunning stereo (Kenwood 10CD autochanger/RDS/etc unit, no extra
    		     charge)
    Comfortable seats
    
    Minus points
    ============
    The PAS is too light
    5th Gear is too low
    Economy is ok (avg 35mpg), but not as good as my Calibra was
    
    So far so good. I'm still impressed with the car, and still get great
    pleasure from driving it. I doubt that I'll get another in 2� years
    time although I'll probably pass this one on to the other half. I'm
    quite tempted by a Volvo 850 T5 (estate of course), or a Coup� FIAT,
    but I don't regret purchasing the Rover.
    
    Clive

    
    >>    quite tempted by a Volvo 850 T5 (estate of course), or a Coup� FIAT,
    >>but I don't regret purchasing the Rover.
    
    
    Can't see you driving a bog standard (!) T5, thought the T5-R would be
    more suitable for transporting your current menagerie around...!
    
    Chris.

    
    There's not much 'bog standard' about the T5, although the T5-R is a
    bit of a monster! :^) Funny, really, but Clive's taste in cars is
    almost exactly the same as mine (Calibra/2 litre Rover/Fiat Coup� and,
    dare I whisper it, even the Turbo Volvo 850!).
    
    Mark

    
    >>There's not much 'bog standard' about the T5...
    
    This is true.  I saw a T5-R estate (black thankfully, not the 'dayglo-
    custard' colour Mr George described elsewhere!) a few weeks back.  The
    tyres for that thing must cost a fortune.
    
    BTW, when talking to a Hampshire motorway police bloke down here last
    week he reckoned the T5 they have (as mentioned in 24.somewhere)
    doesn't accelerate as well as their unmarked Senator after 120-ish.  
    The T5 is chipped as well apparently...wonder if that's why...?
    
    Chris.
    

    >          <<< Note 793.362 by RIOT01::KING "Mad mushrooms" >>>
    
    >doesn't accelerate as well as their unmarked Senator after 120-ish.
    
    I can vouch for the acceleration of that unmarked Senator!!!!!!!
    
    I would pull away from it round corners and roundabout but it fair
    raced up behind me on the straights!!!!!!!
    
    After ticking me off for doing 50+ past the football ground, the police
    man commended me for slowing down to 30 whilst driving through
    Kingsclere and let me off with a warning. By the time I'd hit the A339,
    I had a fair idea that it was an unmarked police car behind me!!!!!
    
    POL

>>>
    >          <<< Note 793.362 by RIOT01::KING "Mad mushrooms" >>>
    
    >doesn't accelerate as well as their unmarked Senator after 120-ish.
    
    I can vouch for the acceleration of that unmarked Senator!!!!!!!
    
    I would pull away from it round corners and roundabout but it fair
    raced up behind me on the straights!!!!!!!
>>>

Why didn't he do you for well exceeding the speed limit, I mean, 120-ish
is pushing it a bit

    
    The police driver did find it amusing that sometimes he'd be coming
    'round the bend at the start of the M275 (from the M27) towards Portsmouth
    at 120-ish and have someone trying to get past.  Personally it'd ring
    bells if I was following a dark blue car with a few hundred aerials on
    the roof at almost twice the speed limit...
    
    C.

    ...and dark camera-shaped silhouttes hanging off the inside of the
    roof, or sitting on the dashboard.
    
    :-)
    
    Cheers,
    Dan

    >      <<< Note 793.364 by TOMMII::RDAVIES "Amateur Expert" >>>
    
    >Why didn't he do you for well exceeding the speed limit, I mean,
    >120-ish is pushing it a bit
    
    Good job he wasn't following me on the M40 one Saturday afternoon
    then. There aren't too many roundabouts for me to be able to 
    pull away from him there!!!!!!!!
    
    POL. 

    There's an unmarked police car on the M40 to look out for. It's a 
     red L reg Rover 827i and it to has been chipped. Apparently it is good
    for about 140+ mph. I do know the complete registration, but don't
    think it would be a good idea to publish it here.
    
    Clive 

    
    Not a silver one this time eh?!!! =;*)
    
    The Vento Hampshire police have is lethal if you don't know it exists. 
    You just wouldn't think of it as a police car.  It's a VR6 obviously.
    
    C.

    >Not a silver one this time eh?!!! =;*)
    
    Nah. I was doing about 90 when this V8 Vantage shot past. Moments later
    this red Rover hurtled after the Aston, lights flashing, bedecked with
    aerials and looking like a refugee from Star Wars. They nicked the
    Aston a couple of miles later.
    
    I saw them at Warwick services so went over to be nosey (know your
    enemy, that's what I say) and the pair of them were grinning like
    nutters. Apparently (they said) its a real laugh driving it coz no one
    thinks a Rover 827 can go that fast...
    
    Clive

    
    Clive,
    
    Are you sure it's an 827? I'd've thought the Vitesse Sport had more
    scope for tweaking...
    
    Still, all this talk of 120+ mph is commonplace for me! :^)
    
    Mark.

    Mark,
    
    You might be right thinking about it. The performance was pretty
    blistering. Having said that, I'm pretty sure it was an 827 badge on
    the back. Misdirection maybe?
    
    Clive

    
    >>the back. Misdirection maybe?
    
    Dunno.  The BMW 525i's they have down here (they're phasing them out now
    it appears, for Omegas) are actually 525s.  They reckoned there wasn't
    much speed difference in the 525, 530 and 535, dunno how true it is.
    
    C.

    re.-1
    
    Ey?
    
    >>The BMW 525i's they have down here .... are actually 525s
    
    ???
    
    As for the Rover, surely it's more likely to chip a Turbo car as
    opposed to a fuel injected V6? I imagine it was a Turbo with, as you
    say, 'misdirecting' badges..... surely the police wouldn't stoop this
    low, tho' ?!?! I imagine the V6 would be more appropriate to their
    uses, but I just never heard of a V6 'chip'.
    
    Hmmmmm

    
    re -last
       at least one of the Senators used by the Thames Valley "E" Division
    is a wolf in sheeps clothing, the normal "marked" cars are nearly
    standard 3.0l, 24v jobbies, whereas the unmarked car has the benefit of
    twin geometric turbos (turbii ??)......
    
    
    Alan
        

      
    
    
    The rover 827 has a 2.7l engine , and the vitesse has "only" got a
    2.0l turbo ,so the 827 has a better top end acceluration .
    i've personaly out run a BMW 535i from 100-130 mph before his
    bottle went.
    i would never underestimate the rover 827 as it's very light
    and powerful car having driven my dads rover 827sli .
    {perticularly a chiped one}
  

    
    If you happen to be in Cumbria don`nt try to race  White Escort Cosworths
    or Rover 440 GTI`s on the A66 `cause if you do, the front grills tend 
    to turn into a most amazing flashing blue mass !! (I found out the hard
    way by thinking the white Rover 440 coming up very fast and flashing
    it`s headlights wanted a race...I gave it a race - and won - ) it was
    then that the front grill burst into life ... I got away with a bit of
    a talking to from a VERY nice policewoman.
    
    Doug (now a slower driver)                      

    
    A standard 827 _might_ be faster than a 2 litre Turbo (possibly due to
    more relaxed gearing?), but the work required to turn a Vitesse 2 litre 
    into an 827 beater is nothing more than upping the boost. To make an 827 
    _very_ fast would require a lot more work.
    
    Mark
    
    PS Re.377 as this is _really_ the Rover note, I'll point out that, to
    my knowledge, Rover don't yet make a 4 litre 400! :^) 

    
    Whats all this about the Vitesse being a 2 litre mines a 2.7, did they
    stop making the 827 Vitesse then or what ?
                                                  

    Yep, about 2 years ago!
    
    The Vitesse was the first use of the 2 litre M16 Turbo (as opposed to the 
    T16 - torque enhanced M16) engine, which is now fitted to the coup� and 
    the 220 & 420 GSi turbos (not sure what the 620 Turbo has, I didn't
    think the Rover engine was supposed to fit? Or was that disinformation?)
    
    Latest and greatest is the Vitesse Sport which is claimed (by some of
    the press) to be a worthy successor to the SD1 Vitesse.
    
    Mark

    
    Re .351
    
    Has anyone else had problems with a Rover x20 leaking oil?
    
    The leak I reported in .351 hasn't been fixed yet (the car's in the
    garage at the moment) and the crankshaft oil seal, head gasket, cam
    cover gasket and  speedo cable gasket have all been changed.
    
    The latest plan is to replace the sump gasket, the sump itself and/or
    the gearbox oil seal. Rover Germany have looked at the car and the
    garage are trying VERY hard to fix it (The bill's being picked up by
    Rover, BTW), but it seems to be a small, but determined leak continues.
    
    Other than this problem, I'm still pleased with the car, but it's been
    back so many times recently that I'm getting more used to driving a LHD
    Fiesta than my own car!
    
    I just wondered if anyone else had had a problem and what the solution
    was? The oil is dripping from the area of the bellhousing, but may not
    be originating from there, by the way.
    
    Mark
                                          

    Nothing yet on my 42, Mark. I'll have a look over the weekend. How many
    miles had yours done when the leak first appeared? Mines up to 12,000
    and due its second service in a weeks time.
    
    Clive

    
    The problem occured, suddenly, around 12k. :^)
    
    FWIW, the garage say they don't have problems with these engines
    leaking oil, as a rule. Not that that helps me much...
    
    Mark

    
    I'm going to tempt fate and say that the garage have fixed the problem.
    
    Last time it was in (3 weeks ago), they replaced the sump, as it turned
    out that it wasn't level (I guess the real problem may have been the
    gasket getting old and failing to seal the gap). Since then, it's not
    dropped a single drop (I hope I don't regret typing that! :^)).
    
    Mark

    Fingers crossed. My 420 has its 12,000 mile service next week. I
    haven't noticed any oil leaks (touch wood).
    
    Clive

    
    I've been monitoring the Rover's fuel consumption over the last couple
    of months.
    
    The bulk of our journies are fairly lengthy (100+ miles) and at speeds
    between 70 and 120 Mph, although the car usually does a couple of short 
    (3-5 miles) journies in the lifetime of a tankfull.
    
    The consumptions generally been in the 33-35 mpg range given the above
    pattern of driving, but over the last week or two (due to very wet
    weather) the car's done a lot of short journies, which pushed the
    consumption down to round about 28 Mpg, which was a bit of a shock.
    However, this weekend we went to the Black Forest and did a lot of
    gentle driving around (c 50 mph in 4th and 5th gear) which boosted the
    consumption to an astonishing 40+ mpg (which is better than the
    economical Calibra ever recorded)!
    
    Mark
    
    BTW The car is a 3 door Rover 220 GSi now 18 months old.

Hi,

I've owned a Rover 220 GTI 16v for nearly 4 months now.  A J-reg with 
catalyst.

Previously a MK1 Golf owner (written off by a third party), I was 
pleasantly surprised on looking at this car.  Nice light interior, power 
steering, electric windows and sunroof. Superb (non-ABS) brakes.  
Quiet, refined with a reasonable Insurance cost.

OK, I'm used to a much lighter GTI car, which didn't have dull engine 
management or a catalyst so throttle response is poor on everything I 
drive!

However if driven accordingly the 220 goes, and goes well, I find I'm on 1 
1/2 grears lower in the Rover!  It doesn't sound thrashed and revs well.
I find I'm usually driving around at very low revs, or pushing the car 
hard.  Very little in between, strange?  Maybee it's something to do with 
it being a rare compbination of 16-valves and tuning for torque, not power.

I have read Mark's comments about the nice handling.  
But, Mark, I have to disagree. Although the grip is outstanding, as 
standard, the handling isn't the best for this class of car.  The straight 
ahead feel, turn-in and correction response were much better in the early 
golf (ok, with strut bar and gas damping extras), but also the Clio 16v and 
Citreon ZX Volcane were much better too.

Having got a brochure off of Moto-build, I found the answer.  Anti-torque 
steer bushes...

If you look at the 200/400 front struts, there is a simple bar which goes 
straight forward to the chassis near the bumper, holding the wishbone in 
position taking the momentum of the car.  This has bubber bushes both 
sides, to reduce bumps felt through the steering wheel, but also giving 
play and absorbing much of the feel some drivers look for.  

These bushes cost 40 for the set of 4 poly<mumble> bush inserts.  Fitting 
can be very simple.  Undo the tie rod from the front of the car, undo the 
two bolts holding the rod to the wishbone/hub and insert the extra bushes 
*with* the original soft rubber.  Do it all back up and it's done.  Mine 
took 20minutes to undo the first, a couple of hours to get it done back up, 
before I guessed a clamp helps keep things aligned go get the front num the 
two rear bolts back in.  The passenger side then took 20minutes to undo 20 
minutes to do back up.  Or moto-build can do it for around 60 pound labour.

The difference is *unbelievable*.  The turn-in is now very good, stright 
ahead in the mortorway is vastly improved, almost as immediate as the 
little golf. It also feels safer accelerating and braking hard.  There is a 
little extra feel and bump through the steering and the car may be very 
slightly firmer on the road.  To me it transforms the handling feel from a 
mushy saloon to a real GTI. 

The price is steep at 10 per bush, but the result is very good value. 
Apparently the soft bushes are inflicted on the 200/400 range, 
so all 200/400's benefit, for the Turbo's it's unsafe no to change them!

Speed and potential are not improved, no standard part is changed to I can 
seen no justifiable argument from an insurer.  I've no connection with 
Moto-build, I just wanted to pass on this invisible little improvement to 
an already good car.

Rob.

    Hi Rob,
    
    Do you have any more details? The only complaint I have with my 420 GSi
    is lack of feel and poor turn-in. These bushes sound like just the
    ticket.
    
    Cheers
    Clive

Clive,

Details are in internal mail, am I right in assuming you are in Leeds @LZR, 
since you don't appear in ELF.

If you're near Reading, give me some notice and you're welcome to have a 
go.

Cheers,
Rob.

    Rob,
    
    Thanks, I'm @LZO (although Allin1 is @REO). Next time I'm down south,
    I'll take you up on your offer.
    
    Cheers
    Clive

    
    Perhaps we should start a new topic called the New New Rover 200 :-)
    
    I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who has driven either the
    new 200 or the new 400....
    
    Cheers
    
    Tim

>    I'd be interested in hearing from anyone who has driven either the
>    new 200 or the new 400....
    
	I have, and I've created a new topic for it (strangely I
	also started this topic - seems like only yesterday!)

	-John

    What about the 200 model that replaced the old shape about a year ago
    before the 'all new' model.
    
    It seems strange that it had such a short life span.
    
    Royston