Rover 620 Si auto - "worth" buying

mgdavid

well said Joe...

Gloomendoom

colino wrote: »

Hang on to the Mondeo. The Rover 800s were old-fashioned when they came out new, were slow, heavy, unreliable and about as nimble as a barge. Just about everything on them can and will go wrong, the saving grace is their weight as you will get more from the scrappy for them.

Interesting. My last one managed over 150k miles before anything went wrong with it (I had it from new.) Even then, it was just a couple of worn out suspension bushes. With over 170 bhp, it was also pretty quick. If I remember correctly, it weighed around 1300kg... about the same as a Mondeo.

colino

The average motorist will have about 25 cars in their lifetime and naturally assume the one they have their bum perched on "is" the marque. The 800s were designed by Rover to crack the US big car market, hence the enormous exterior length, without accompanying interior space, the over-soft steering and suspension and the overuse of tacky fabrics and materials inside. No other car of the era plummeted so far and so fast in depreciation, no other car was so badly put together (they went back to their tried and tested 8-valve O series engine to try to stop the flood of warranty claims for a period) and no other car had basic system failures in starters, heaters, fuel pumps and timing belts, none of which were new technology. Traders will remember the new timing belt pack they rushed out to prevent early failures. Unbelievably it was a circle of emery paper to bolt between the timing belt tensioner and the block to stop it slipping! That last point reminded me of another face-palm memory of the 800s. Failure of the petrol locking flap was so common, the dealers had them on the shelf in a huge array of ready to fit, fully colour painted, bags! I gave away the last two 800s I had.

Gloomendoom

colino wrote: »

The average motorist will have about 25 cars in their lifetime and naturally assume the one they have their bum perched on "is" the marque. The 800s were designed by Rover to crack the US big car market, hence the enormous exterior length, without accompanying interior space, the over-soft steering and suspension and the overuse of tacky fabrics and materials inside. No other car of the era plummeted so far and so fast in depreciation, no other car was so badly put together (they went back to their tried and tested 8-valve O series engine to try to stop the flood of warranty claims for a period) and no other car had basic system failures in starters, heaters, fuel pumps and timing belts, none of which were new technology. Traders will remember the new timing belt pack they rushed out to prevent early failures. Unbelievably it was a circle of emery paper to bolt between the timing belt tensioner and the block to stop it slipping! That last point reminded me of another face-palm memory of the 800s. Failure of the petrol locking flap was so common, the dealers had them on the shelf in a huge array of ready to fit, fully colour painted, bags! I gave away the last two 800s I had.

My bum isn't perched in an 800 any more. Rover didn't go back to the O series engine, it was only available in the base model alongside the 16v four cylinder and 24v six cylinder engines. As far as interior space and quality of trim materials go, I'm not sure what contemporary car you are comparing the car against, but all the ones I had were head and shoulders above the equivalent Ford or Vauxhall offerings.

I must have had six or seven 800's in total with all different petrol and diesel engine options except the petrol turbo. All were utterly reliable.

OddballJamie

Jack_Regan wrote: »

The 620Ti was a very fast car in it's day.

When it was running that is.:D

Back in the day my Dad requested one as a company car and ended up with a Sierra Sapphire lol.

jase1

spacey2012 wrote: »

Reliability is an easy test, just count how many you see still on the road still going.

I would qualify that by saying that you have to compare the numbers on the road with the numbers sold in the first place.

I've had this argument with my father who is convinced that Fords and Vauxhalls are the most reliable cars on the road just because you happen to see a lot of 10-15 year old ones. That's mostly a function of the fact that they sold by the bucketload but he just doesn't see it.

In any case it doesn't really work anyway -- VWs for example tend to stay on the road for longer than some other marques because they're actually worth something well into old age. That's a self-fulfilling prophecy -- people are more likely to replace a gearbox on a 10 year old car that's worth £2000 than on a 10 year old car that's worth £300.

Joe_Horner

jase1 wrote: »

I would qualify that by saying that you have to compare the numbers on the road with the numbers sold in the first place.

It can also work the other way round.

We have a Pug 405 DT estate, which used to be everywhere. They were very reliable, very rust-free (the part that set them aside from the contemporary Montego Countryman with it's wonderful Perkins engine), very economical (though not quite as good as the Monty), and clocked up huge mileages because people just kept using them.

Now you hardly see them because most of them have simply been worn out by at least 16 years of hard use carrying loads and towing over hundreds of thousands of miles - 200k wasn't unsusual, 500k has been known.

jase1

Joe_Horner wrote: »

It can also work the other way round.

We have a Pug 405 DT estate, which used to be everywhere. They were very reliable, very rust-free (the part that set them aside from the contemporary Montego Countryman with it's wonderful Perkins engine), very economical (though not quite as good as the Monty), and clocked up huge mileages because people just kept using them.

Now you hardly see them because most of them have simply been worn out by at least 16 years of hard use carrying loads and towing over hundreds of thousands of miles - 200k wasn't unsusual, 500k has been known.

Taxi syndrome

See Skoda Octavia (noticed how thin on the ground old ones are?) and Nissan Bluebird/Primera for more of the same.

If a car is a common target for mini-cabbers then they end up rarely making it to 10 years old, precisely because they get run to stupid mileages.

Joe_Horner

jase1 wrote: »

Taxi syndrome

See Skoda Octavia (noticed how thin on the ground old ones are?) and Nissan Bluebird/Primera for more of the same.

If a car is a common target for mini-cabbers then they end up rarely making it to 10 years old, precisely because they get run to stupid mileages.

Yep, and we all know that cabbies choose their cars for unreliability

Funnily enough, and heading a little back towards topic, the Mk 2 Rover 400 diesels were quite popular back in their day!

motorguy

Jack_Regan wrote: »

The 620Ti was a very fast car in it's day.

When it was running that is.:D

Fantastic cars. I remember seriously embarassing a VR6 golf in mine. Ran it for about a year. Only problem was fuel consumption - low 20's, but then i did drive it like it was meant to be driven.

Sold it on to a friend of a friend who ran it for another 3 years without any issue. Again, his only complaint was fuel consumption