Which 75?

Neal P2
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:05 pm

Re: Which 75?

Post by Neal P2 » Mon Mar 01, 2010 9:55 am

Hello Paul,

Many thanks for your experiences and pointers - it’s really good to hear experiences over this period of ownership and thanks for the link which I will check out. - I have been looking at many adverts on different sites of 75’s for sale and it’s quite interesting to see that there is not a lot of difference between the prices of the various engine versions or even between the different trim spec levels - so this why I wanted to pick up on the flaws or advantages of each version.

Many thanks again

regards

Neal

andrewmcg
Posts: 120
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 7:40 pm

Re: Which 75?

Post by andrewmcg » Mon Mar 01, 2010 7:49 pm

Hello there Neal and Paul

Out of interest I have just done a 120 mile round trip in the 2.5 Auto with the ATC on, using mainly the A14 and M11 (with 10% on minor roads). Having reset trip computer at start of journey it returned a consumption of 29.3 mpg, not bad view a very cold start this morning.
I agree with you Paul it's not a simple job when it comes to a belt change. I had mine done about 2 years ago, at a cost of £698, it was a 7.9 hour job!!!, the labour came to £398, the parts at £300 included 3 belts, tensioner, guide pulley,water pump and a few sundry liquids and seals. Replacing the guide pulley and water pump not essential but recommended as worthwhile preventive action whilst engine partly stripped.
Paul I was not aware of split in the 75/mgzt forum will now have a look at the one you mention.

Regards
Andrew

Neal P2
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:05 pm

Re: Which 75?

Post by Neal P2 » Mon Mar 01, 2010 8:26 pm

Hi Andrew,
That mpg doesn't sound too bad for a round trip like that.
The belt change certainly sounds an involved job, but I paid approx £500 for a Renault one a couple of years back so I guess it's unfortunately the price we pay these days and that didn't include a pump.

Thanks again

Regards

Neal

Neal P2
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:05 pm

Re: Which 75?

Post by Neal P2 » Tue Jul 27, 2010 8:40 am

Just a quick update and thank you to everyone who replied earlier this year.

I finally bought myself a 75 and took delivery last week. I opted in the end for a 2.5 V6 - It's smoothness won me over!

Thanks again for all your advice and experiences.

Regards

Neal

Hungry_Horse_1955
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 11:13 pm
Contact:

Re: Which 75?

Post by Hungry_Horse_1955 » Mon Oct 18, 2010 4:38 pm

Just as an aside, the problem with the 'K' series engines was not the head gaskets, although this is where the problem vented (sic) itself.

The problem was with the plate that the head bolts screw into. Some accountant decided to save £10 or so on the design and had this plate reduced in thickness, causing it to flex in service, thus losing the seal on the head gasket. Replacing the head gasket with a thicker one does not cure the problem, it just masks it for longer!

You can now buy a thicker plate (it has a special name and I can't for the life of me remember what it is called) which will not flex during normal operation, although I think it costs a bit more to install than replacing the gasket.

Suffice to say, the 'K' series engine can be a reliable engine!
Clive

2001 Range Rover Vogue
1994 Range Rover LSE
1987 Range Rover Vogue EFi (Awaiting restoration)
1979 Range Rover Carmichael Commando RIV
1974 Range Rover Carmichael Commando RIV
1939 Rover 16 Sports Saloon
1991 VW Golf Country Chrom-Edition

ralphg
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 1:07 pm

Re: Which 75?

Post by ralphg » Tue May 01, 2012 2:33 pm

I'll add my 2 penn'th, as I've owned and serviced quite a few Rover 75s and MG ZTs.


There are 2 engines that stand out above the others. They are the 1.8 turbo and the diesel.

The 1.8 turbo is lower compression than the standard 1.8 (which is under powered for such a heavy car) which helps reduce the occurrence of head gasket failure (HGF). Regular oil changes with decent oil are a must to prevent premature failure of the turbo.

The V6 engines are good but thirsty. The 2.0l is prone to cam shaft failure on the front shaft. Cam belt changes are expensive and require special tools. The thermostat housing, in the middle of the V, is prone to leaking. If not fixed quickly they can lead to engine failure through overheating.

The 2.0l BMW M47R engine is brilliant. However, it does have an Achilles heal - the PCV. This needs to be cleaned regularly, otherwise it can get blocked which will kill the engine. There is a replacement part that does not contain a filter that can be bought from a BMW dealer, which I would recommend. Fuel pumps are also susceptible to failure.

Neal P2
Posts: 50
Joined: Fri Feb 27, 2009 2:05 pm

Re: Which 75?

Post by Neal P2 » Wed May 02, 2012 3:11 pm

I have now had my 75 almost 2 years and have not regretted it at all. In the 2 years it has only required the normal servicing.

I bought it intending it to be weekend / leisure use but have ended up using it as an everyday car back and forth to central London everyday and yes it is thirsty in these conditions of stop / start and it being an auto 2.5. On longer runs it's not bad for a larger engine returning 35mpg if you are not too tempted to use it's power!

The things I have found to watch out for are - the drains in the plenums must be kept clear of any leafs or debris or it fills up with water and drowns the engine management unit (stupid place to put it!) and the boots are prone to leaking either around the rear light seals, the side trim or the rear screen seal and you can end up with a pond where the spare wheel sits (or floats!).

They are certainly a lot of car for the money though, and a real pleasure to drive, but with the youngest ones now 7 years old they are starting to disappear off our roads as it's often cheaper to scrap than repair them if something major fails.

Perhaps as time goes on the ones left will end up a classic! Particularly as it's one of the last 'Rover' badged cars although having had early Rovers I feel it's only a Rover by name and badge and sadly shares nothing with it's predecessors.

ralphg
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue May 01, 2012 1:07 pm

Re: Which 75?

Post by ralphg » Tue May 08, 2012 10:44 am

I forgot to mention about the ECU...

The wiring loom can also wear through on the offside behind the bumper.

The BMW diesel engine is detuned compared with the equivalent BMW car. You can gain an easy 15BHP with a visit to a BMW dealer to have the latest maps loaded ;)

Also, these cars lend more to BMW than Rover as they were launched when the company was in BMW ownership. I often think that BMW deliberately sabotaged the Rover 75, so that it didn't compete with their vehicles.

Post Reply