That's a bit of a sweeping statement, eh Martin?
|
I've had my Rover 75 for three months now, a chipped CDTi Connoisseur saloon. It is an absolute delight to drive, super smooth drive, fantastic ride and ultra quiet cab, I mean really, really quiet, the damping materials and thicker glass make a real difference. The gearbox is matched to the engine really well with a final drive of 30mph/1000rpm in top.
I took three people and a shed load of luggage down to Bude in it and it was a stormer up and down the hills and passing places of the A38. It took the hills no problem and with judicous use of the torque could easily blast up the hill with a full load to overtake less able cars.
As for a Passat/Laguna/S40 comparison. The Rover 75 is a much more rounded proposition. In a Driver Power survey the 75 left the Passat and Laguna well behind beating them in 8/10 categories. The 75 is very well screwed together, the plastics are very durable and it is a very high quality interior. The engine is a peach and no slouch with 300Nm of torque available on the chipped version. Cruising at 30mph at 1000rpm is still rather a strange feeling.
I'd bargain hard, you'll get a good deal. I bought a pre-reg'd '52' and got £3750 off and £1500 of options thrown in as well and the chip plus the balance of the 3-year warranty, 6 months road tax and some diesel ;)
Also in terms of depreciation, the CDTi is the least depreciating of all 75's, worth 48% of its value after 3 years.
Absolutely no mechanical niggles, the exception being a faulty rear speaker, they replaced all four speakers and wires without any quibbles.
|
3500S,
I'm equally impressed with my 75 CDT except, as I mentioned above, the road noise over anything other than very smooth surfaces. I don't know if this is down to the tyres (Firestones) or the car itself. Perhaps it wouldn't be that obvious if my BMW wasn't so quiet in this respect (but it cost £11,000 more than the Rover, and that was 11 years ago!). Even my old Triumph 2500 is quieter regarding road noise!
Mine is also a Connoisseur but it is the 2003 model which has only a front anti-roll bar whereas earlier ones had ARBs at both front and rear. I expect Rover stiffened the rear suspension to help counteract the ARB deletion and this may the problem. Pity they can't leave things alone!
The car is still better riding than many, but has nowhere near the 'floating armchair' ride that I had been led to expect and is not noticeably better than my BMW 525 estate. It does have far better handling than I'd expected though, surprisingly close to the RWD BMW. Again, these things are probably down to the recent suspension changes.
Three questions that I'd be pleased to have your answers on:
1. Do you notice pronounced tyre noise with yours?
2. What tyres are fitted?
3. Does it have a rear anti-roll bar? (I believe the rear ARB was deleted at the same time as the folding rear seat was made a standard fitment).
|
|
|
3500S -
As someone looking to buy a similar spec 75 to the one you have recently bought could you advise me where you went to get that kind of a deal? Many thanks.
|
Sure,
I have Conti Contacts on mine and the 15'' alloys because I was told the 16'' take a lower profile type and it affects the ride.
I do notice road roar on the more 'chunkier' surfaces rather than smooth tarmac and it is quite noisy but I think its more noticable because it's always so quiet at other times. Someone told me why but it's kind of lost in the mists of time. I think it's something to do with the suspension bushes they fitted on '01 cars as the felt kits on the rubber gators wasn't damping the suspension clonks so they fitted harder bushes.
As for the rear axle ARB, I have a Dec '02 car and I only have the 'ski hatch' opener on the rear seats so I'd imagine the ARB is fitted. It is a bizarre feeling taking corners sharply as any side force into the corner occurs when the rear wheels are on the apex of the corner. It then rides the corner superbly well with a little body roll. Maybe it's because I have to be more aware on power into corner owning 1 FWD and 1 RWD car and mixing up the approach to a corner could be messy.
I've noticed over older 75's they've made a number of revisions to the car and some deletions due to cost. But then a Connoisseur was supposed to retail at £23K not £19K.
To answer where I got it, try SMC Rover, they are a very large turnover dealership and they do get some very good pre-reg deals from MGR. I got lucky, they'd got 15 pre-reg'd '52' 75 CDT's the week I went in.
|
3500S, thanks for the info. Conti Eco-Contacts were particularly quiet on my BMW (the Dunlop spare was quite a bit noisier) but it looks like the noise is down to the suspension bushes as you suggest.
I think the rear ARB was deleted for the 2003 cars so you just made it! As you probably know, it was kept for the V6-engined cars so it obviously served a worthwhile purpose. My wheels are also the standard 15" by the way.
When I fitted a front ARB to my Triumph I found that I needed notably weaker front springs to get the best ride because, as you will know, the two springs now share the load when either front wheel is deflected up or down. I didn't fit a rear ARB to the Triumph and I found that the adjustable Koni dampers needed to be set very soft to give the best ride/handling compromise. This all turned out superbly but I don't want to carry out similar experiments on the 75.
|
|
|
|
Paul, unfortunately you have chosen not to show your Profile. It would help us to recommend somewhere if we knew whereabouts you live, assuming that you would prefer to purchase locally.
W H Brand & Son of Whaplode drove, nr Spalding, Lincs., usually have half a dozen 'delivery mileage only - pre-reg' 75s at well discounted prices. I expect there are a lot of other Rover dealers that offer these -- certainly no need to pay anywhere near list price at the moment.
|
Sounds like a wicked set-up on the Triumph, what is it a 2.5 PI or a Toledo? A superb car but lived in the Rover P6 shadow a bit ;) Those two cars in my humble opinion created the sports saloon market.
My 3500s has a traverse suspension on the front which can lead to a little wander occasionally! Mainly due the De Dion set up at the back as it's too good at maintaining serious V8 torque!
I looked under the 75 before setting home and it has an ARB, now I know, I must try it out ;) I do prefer the setup of the P6 though, it's much more honest and direct.
I admit the sooner we see a RWD Rover the better.
|
I admit the sooner we see a RWD Rover the better.
They're coming, be patient! Well, at least the MG versions are, the Rover 75 V8 is still just hearsay AFAIK.
|
|
|
The Triumph is a 2.5, ex-PI and now on twin SU HS6 carbs. No longer as eager as a PI but still very lively - definitely still a sports saloon.
The anti-roll bar addition was simpler than it sounds. I took one from a 2500S, together with the matching suspension arms etc. The 2500S arms are a bit prone to cracking so I modified mine to make them far stronger.
I don't agree that the Triumph "lived in the Rover P6 shadow", not for me anyway. The Rover 3500S is an exceptional car but, in my opinion, the 4-cyl version that it derived from wasn't in the same league as the Triumph.
I used to work on Rover 2000s and much of the car was quite difficult to work on. I disliked having to grind shims to adjust valve clearances; also changing these required lifting the camshaft housing and this was held by the cylinder head bolts, so every shim change necessitated loosening and retightening the cyl head bolts! Getting the correct valve clearance was made even worse on the TC version because the high-lift camshaft, in an aluminium head, made so much valve noise that you didn't know if they were set right or wrong! Then there was the TC's tubular exhaust manifold which readily cracked so that the engine made even more noise.
The rear brakes would have been similar to yours on the 3500S, a so-and-so to work on. The starter motor could also fail, I think by bending its shaft, and removing this from the TC meant removing the exhaust manifold - which meant removing the inlet manifold - which meant removing the water connection - which meant draining or losing some water --- and then 'reassemble in the reverse order'. Changing a starter motor was a long job on the Rover but literally only five minutes on the Triumph.
I suppose the Rover 2000/2200 was in many ways an advance on the P4 and P5 but, having also had fair experience of the P4 (original Rover 75) and P5B (3500 coupe), I prefer both of these to the 2000/2200 by a long chalk. I'd love a 3500S though!
By the way '3500S', it's well known that the Rover V8 originated as a Buick engine, but did you know that Buick based their design on a BMW engine? So you now have two cars with essentially BMW engines!
|
|
|
|
|
I don't suppose anyone will see this now but I'm based in West Sussex - so SMC (in Slough) is not too far but a nearer option would be better.
|
thank you very much for all you help
Well look at that
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
