Brand new car -102miles- £3250

Quiet_Spark

motorguy wrote: »

The MG and Turbo versions werent great, they were "interesting" yes, but werent "good" cars in their own right. Though they're probably the ones you'd want these days if you were interested in keeping one as a prospective classic

I took a job back in 86 as an auto sparks working for Douglas Graham's in Balham (Austin Rover dealer at the time), and my second job of my first day was the Vanden Plas model of Maestro that was speaking random warnings about the car needing a service.

To be honest I didn't think they were that good then, and they certainly wouldn't be considered any good now by any right thinking person IMO.

I had the Montego Turbo back then (complete with manic torque steer when the turbo kicked in), and again while it was definitely fun to drive at the time I don't think I would have one now even if it was being given away.

motorguy

Quiet_Spark wrote: »

I took a job back in 86 as an auto sparks working for Douglas Graham's in Balham (Austin Rover dealer at the time), and my second job of my first day was the Vanden Plas model of Maestro that was speaking random warnings about the car needing a service.

To be honest I didn't think they were that good then, and they certainly wouldn't be considered any good now by any right thinking person IMO.

I had the Montego Turbo back then (complete with manic torque steer when the turbo kicked in), and again while it was definitely fun to drive at the time I don't think I would have one now even if it was being given away.

I sold Austin Rovers new from 1988 for a couple of years, so in and around when the "You aint seen nothing yet" two tone Montegos and Maestros came onto the market.

They sold in decent numbers - particularly the Maestro. My dad had a 1985 1.3 Montego, then a 1.6L. Got years out of them both with no major bills.

iolanthe07

I had a Maestro in 1984. It was OK for its time, and quite roomy for a family. The (German) gearbox was excellent and the ancient A series engine reliable enough. I never had any corrosion problems. They used to advertise it as 'Miracle Maestro'!

andy111

Driving is believing..


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QIDeI4Zu9iA

motorguy

colino wrote: »

If you remember them correctly, they were bulbous, ungainly sheds built over antique engines with minor, "advances" such as unreliable stepper motors bolted on to ancient SUs. BL couldn't even work out how to transmit the mighty power from their own A series engine, so bought in VW gearboxes instead. Typical stunted thinking from the industrial powerhouse, rehashing old rubbish while others were designing from the ground up.
Forgot to add the sporty ones were very, very fast. No doubt aided by using fag paper thin metal to reduce weight that even Fiat would have thought underpar.

It was quite common back then to stick with old reliable engines. Wasnt Ford using a derivative of the Ford Anglia engine up until recent years in the Ford KA for example?

knightstyle

Was made redundant and lost company car, only thing I could afford was a 3 year old 1.6 Maestro, hated it at first but grew to appreciate it, did 50k in 3 years, taught two teenagers to drive in it and it never let us down.
Son confessed later to doing an indicated 95mph in it showing off to friends but it was shaking so much he chickened out of the magical 100!

Quiet_Spark

motorguy wrote: »

I sold Austin Rovers new from 1988 for a couple of years, so in and around when the "You aint seen nothing yet" two tone Montegos and Maestros came onto the market.

They sold in decent numbers - particularly the Maestro. My dad had a 1985 1.3 Montego, then a 1.6L. Got years out of them both with no major bills.

I remember those 2 tone paint jobs, quite hideous now but very popular back in the day.
The Monty & Maestro were indeed very popular cars and definitely fell in to the "people's car" bracket, essentially they were the answer to the Escort & Sierra offered by Ford at the time IMO.

During my Montego ownership I only suffered two faults.
One was fuel pump failure (rectified by replacing the pump), and the second one was what we today would call "limp mode" which was brought on by the turbo failing to boost correctly due to signals failing to get back to the ECU thanks to the OSR brake light fuse failing (only god knows why they used that circuit for turbo feedback).

patman99

They had the best all-round visibility of any car ever made.

As for using a VW gearbox, it is not uncommon to find car makers using each other's parts as it is cheaper than designing their own.

marlot

colino wrote: »

...so bought in VW gearboxes instead..

More sensible than the inter-brand rivalry of BL's past, such as Triumph insisting on designing its own engine for the Stag, rather than using Rover's V8.

Lots of manufacturers now buy their gearboxes in - typically from ZF or Aisin.

Nodding_Donkey

I think the fact that a good condition 30 year old car with only 102 miles on the clock only made pocket money at a classic car auction speaks volumes