Citroen C5 or Rover 75?

bigjl

Scooby_Doo. wrote: »

So it was down to Labour that Rover built sh1te cars and didn't move with the times was it?

What do you really know about anything.

Anybody that has driven a R75 in diesel form will never agree with you.

The same goes for Rover 600 owners, especially as they were basically a Honda Accord.

As far as i am aware they had few issues that the Accord didn't have aswell.

A lot of the head gasket issue where sorted long ago.

Yes they still went occasionally but i am not going to defend the k series engine, but Rover had turned the corner when Labour let it get cherry picked by BMW.

But why are you commenting, weren't you still in Primary School so your opinion, as usual, carries little weight, more of a distraction or anniyance really.

rag31

Hello everyone!

Thank you for all your helpful advice. I have gone for the Rover 75 I get it mid next week!

I couldn't give a rats a*se about any kind of exciting drive or dull/whatever cars. I am a single mum of 4. I have a low budget, I need a reliable and economical car for me and my 4 children and to cart my work stuff about to jobs.

I searched for a long time for one that filled various other criteria (diesel and automatic narrowed the field hugely), basically reliable, good mpg, a tow bar, a fsh, well looked after etc. I've been so worried about this purchase because unfortunately a few years ago I was conned by a fly-by-night garage that was there one the minute and gone the next after selling me a car that was 'dangerous to drive' and I lost all my money.

I'm very happy with the choice and fingers crossed I will be driving my children around for many years to come in this car.

Becky

Gloomendoom

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

why should have labour helped they were a private company(s) we werent in a recession, the market was good, rover went down hill not because of the HG failure its because of their past debts and not moving with design and innovation. the chineese have the MG side, and they seemed to have produced a fairly good looking MG.

And the blame for that can be laid fair and square at the door of BMW. They called the shots. As far as design is concerned they dictated what Rover could, and could not, do.

They were paranoid that Rover would produce anything that would compete head on with anything they made.

Jakg

Gloomendoom wrote: »

And the blame for that can be laid fair and square at the door of BMW. They called the shots. As far as design is concerned they dictated what Rover could, and could not, do.

They were paranoid that Rover would produce anything that would compete head on with anything they made.

Ironically the 75 had quite a lot of new tech - Z-Axle suspension, FWD chassis with a transmission tunnel (which BMW later used on the Mini), common rail engine, CANBUS, loads of BMW electrics etc.

wazza

Jakg wrote: »

Ironically the 75 had quite a lot of new tech - Z-Axle suspension, FWD chassis with a transmission tunnel (which BMW later used on the Mini), common rail engine, CANBUS, loads of BMW electrics etc.

The transmission tunnel became useful when they installed a 4.6litre v8 ford mustang engine to create a rear wheel drive rover 75 v8

where does one stand regarding spare parts? I remember reading a while back there was a shortage of a radiator fan or something similar

leadhead

rag31 wrote: »

Hello everyone!

Thank you for all your helpful advice. I have gone for the Rover 75 I get it mid next week!

I couldn't give a rats a*se about any kind of exciting drive or dull/whatever cars. I am a single mum of 4. I have a low budget, I need a reliable and economical car for me and my 4 children and to cart my work stuff about to jobs.

I searched for a long time for one that filled various other criteria (diesel and automatic narrowed the field hugely), basically reliable, good mpg, a tow bar, a fsh, well looked after etc. I've been so worried about this purchase because unfortunately a few years ago I was conned by a fly-by-night garage that was there one the minute and gone the next after selling me a car that was 'dangerous to drive' and I lost all my money.

I'm very happy with the choice and fingers crossed I will be driving my children around for many years to come in this car.

Becky

Well done, if you require any help or advice, try callling in here,

http://www.forums.mg-rover.org/forumdisplay.php?f=90

you'll be made welcome, and the advice is invaluable, and theres advice on what to look for to avert future problems if the car hasnt been well looked after.....

bigjl

Good call mate, thanks for letting us know what you went for.

Keep it well serviced with good oil and it will last you a good few years.

I would have bought a 75 Estate or MG equivalent when I bought my mk3 Mondeo tdci, but the one I was bidding on went over my limit and three cars later I bagged my Mondeo for well over £1500 under trade price!

Such are the strange happenings at auction, still have a hankering for a leathered up 75/MG estate, diesel auto, mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.

Gloomendoom

Jakg wrote: »

Ironically the 75 had quite a lot of new tech - Z-Axle suspension, FWD chassis with a transmission tunnel (which BMW later used on the Mini), common rail engine, CANBUS, loads of BMW electrics etc.

I know. I was part of the team that designed it.

GlynD

I've owned both the Rover 75 (V6 Connoisseur Automatic) and a Mondeo 1.8. I found both of them to be reliable and excellent cars. I'd take the Rover everytime though because of the luxury and comfort. I wouldn't worry about parts because Phoenix Group maintained ownership of their parts division and they are readily available.

waynedance

Stigy wrote: »

I'm not a great fan of either car, but I'd imagine if anything the 75 would prove more reliable. The C5 still used Citroen's Hydro-Pneumatic suspention, which was great, but it was prone to malfunction, and had the opposite affect on ride and handling as it was supposed to have (working correctly, it was described as magic carpet ride quality...). Also, the same system is responsible for the PAS and braking system, therefore complete failure would be a nightmare! Also, unlike normal braking systems, whereby under failure of the brake servo you'd still have brakes (albeit not very good ones), with this system you'd have real issues stopping.

I assume, given that the hydraulics are the same as the Xantia/BX, so is the handbrake....Which is on the fron discs (therefore if you park at the top of a hill, be sure to leave the car in gear!).

Ok I know it is an old post but wish people knew the facts before posting. C5 brakes have nothing to do with the suspension and what does it matter where the handbrake is? Parts are getting hard to get for the 75 as I work at a garage and know this to be true.