MG-Cars.info

Welcome to our Site for MG, Triumph and Austin-Healey Car Information.

Parts

MG parts spares and accessories are available for MG T Series (TA, MG TB, MG TC, MG TD, MG TF), Magnette, MGA, Twin cam, MGB, MGBGT, MGC, MGC GT, MG Midget, Sprite and other MG models from British car spares company LBCarCo.

MG ZR ZS ZT Technical - ZS180 v ZT160 Turbo

Which one is the better alrounder, need some advice, as its a company purchase.

I do a lot of motorway driving and like a sporty drive. 30,000 miles a year.

Currently drive a Vectra.
James Glover

Performance = ZS180 (more power and much lighter)
Sportiness = ZS180
Ride & Handling = Similar
Fuel Economy = Similar
Build Quality = ZT160
Ergonomics = ZT160

They are very different but equally desirable products, and the only way is to test drive both.

INSIST on a decent test drive before ordering...
Dave

In my view the ZT should be powered by
-a 260 HP V8 or a 190 V6 or the new 135 Diesel
and not by the K4 even at 160 HP
This latter engine has been mainly devised for low CO2/Tax purposes in the UK
If offered,it would be a desirable alternative to the 180V6 in the ZS but of course the ZS is a more dated/less comfortable car than the ZT
andrew

The ZT will be much quieter and relaxing on long motorway journeys. I would have thought that the ZT135 diesel is woth considering for motorways. While you will win few races from the lights, you will have lots of grunt for overtaking.

Cheers

Patrick
Patrick Beet

I had a ZT135 CDTi on loan recently and was really impressed. 3000 rpm equalled a very relaxed 95 mph motorway cruise !!
Sure its 0-60 of about 9.6 secs is hardly earth shattering, but the massive torque available from 1500 rpm made very relaxed and easy "real world" driving.
For my own needs, and I drive around 27000 miles per year mainly on motorways the ZT135 CDTi will fit my needs perfectly. I actually found it a better motorway drive than my current 3 year old KV6 powered R75.
Build quality on my November 1999 built R75 is still exceptional even after 82000 miles, and I'd expect the same from a ZT. I personnaly wouldn't want to use a ZS for 30000 motorway miles per year, as it offers far less refinement.
Last weekend I borrowed a 2 litre Renault Laguna pool car as I needed a hatchback for the weekend. What an awful shed it was, noisy, undergeared, terrible driving position, I couldn't wait to get back into my R75 on Monday.

Adrian

Ive been fortunate to drive both and I wasnt impressed with the ZT 1.8T engine ,the Zs180 is a scream, but will cost the earth to run in fuel bills!!
I'd go for a ZT135 if you can get one.
Rob

Thanks for the informative feedback. Will test drive the ZT135 and ZT160 and see how I get on!
James Glover

>>Last weekend I borrowed a 2 litre Renault Laguna pool car as I needed a hatchback for the weekend. What an awful shed it was, noisy, undergeared, terrible driving position, I couldn't wait to get back into my R75 on Monday.<<

Adrian, I know where you are coming from: I drove the in-law's Peugeot which is about the same age as our 75, with as many miles under its wheels. A shed accurately describes that Pug- noisey, nasty, uncomfortable tin box. The aircon only provided heat at 30C unless set on the coldest setting (when it was freezing). The electric mirrors had packed up. Trim was flimsy. I didn't want to actually look for any other faults.

It was an eye-opener, frankly. Our old 214Si was better built than this car was. My MGF, despite being a soft-top and being 7 years old felt better built and was freer of rattles. And the 75 was shown to dramatic relief as the superb car it truely is.

Why anyone would want a mass produced nasty is beyond me. Give me a 75/ZT any day. Nothing - and I mean nothing, as gone wrong, fallen off or broken on it. No squeaks whistles or rattles. Just silence broken by the occassional song of that wonderful KV6. :o)
Rob Bell

Is this Rover Inferior Build Quality thing really valid now? Is it a REAL problem as many would still insist that we believe. Certainly many do believe it. "Honest John" in this weekend's Torygraph motoring section, IIRC mentioned the build quality question as a possibilty to someone seeking his advice. He was comparing and recommending other production cars to someone considering a replacement for their Rover car with another new(er) Rover.

Some of you may recall my recent "Rover lose another loyal customer" thread. Briefly my retired cousin wanted to replace her Rover Metro with another new Metro only to find they are no longer available. Eventually settled on a new Saxo. Nice little car with willing engine but, flimsy and not as substantial as her Rover in just about every respect. She's pleased with her Saxo but would have preferred another Metro.

However, apparently if you drive a Metro 1/3rd head on into a solid concrete 2 metre cube at a certain speed, they don't come out of this safety "test" as well as other cars. This sort of thing is can be very misleading for many car buyers who believe that by avoiding a Metro they are safe.

Must remember to avoid concrete cubes when driving Metros .... DOH!
John McFeely

No John,

The Metro was a nasty death trap. I have already told you about the 4 grads in my old company that we killed when their Metro was rear ended by a careless Vectra. Fuel tank burst, door could not be open and they all died in the fire outside the office. The Vectra drive was unmarked.

God bless BMW for taking this child killer out of production.

Cheers

Patrick
Patrick Beet

Disappointed to hear that you were not impressed with the 1.8 turbo engine Rob,as I was counting on its eventual upgrade into the ZS 120.As the L diesel upgrade to 113 HP has also not achieved much ,one must start to question the competency of the project teams involved.
andrew

andrew, it's the marketing types that dictate what models get developed - don't blame the engineers, who do the best job they can.
David

"Is this Rover Inferior Build Quality thing really valid now?"

Yes John, with the possible exception of the 75/ZT I'am very very sorry to say that it is.
John Manson

JM - any shred of evidence to support your obviously strongly-held opinion? There's plenty round here and in the archive with tens of thousands of miles in recent Rover products - mostly faultless
David

re Rover Quality

Have just seen the October issue of Auto Journal showing
a)reliability, b)Build quality data on 100 cars in different segments

In its segment,the Rover 75 came equal FIRST with the BMW 3 series-slightly better reliability,slightly worse build quality.

Bravo MGR !
andrew

Sorry David, we have an F (as you know!) and have had a Rover 200 and before that two 800s. Now also have a 75. We have enjoyed all of them, particularly the F!

However the difference in build quality between the 75 and the rest is about as wide as the Grand Canyon. Nothing at all in the 75 appears "low rent" and everything seems to have been deeply thought through. On the others it appears Rover ran competitions for the supplier who could deliver the cheapest possible component!

OK in a bottom of the range car like the 200 but our F was only a bit cheaper than the 75 Conn Estate- this does not compute!

Cheers

Patrick
Patrick Beet

Patrick,

I agree - the 75/ZT platform is much the best in the range!
MG Fan

Got my ZS180 just before MGCC Silverstone this year, done 8000 miles, all trouble free except for a failed power steering hose (that necessitated a line-request due to lack of available parts). Build quality fine, it feels solid, no rattles etc. But, oh, the petrol consumption - 26 mpg overall.
Magnette

(However the difference in build quality between the 75 and the rest is about as wide as the Grand Canyon.)

Oh dear Patrick,you haven't been drinking too much of the Harveys Bristol Cream have you?
You would only have to trawl the other MG forums to see that the ZS is equal in build quality terms to the ZT with the only problem of note being ZS owners assaulted by big wing boot lids.
I must say i found it very amusing MG rover making the option of softer suspension settings available to ZT owners,the only conclusion i could make from this was the sports set up was a little to hard for owners piles.......... ;)
So my round up is this
The ZS is for someone who lives being MG
The ZT for someone who dreams it!

Michael Moore
m moore

Michael,

You are confusing reliability with build quality.

I am confident that Rover (or whatever they have been called before or since) have provided reliable transport. Why else would I have had so many? I will also happily concede that they have had character and charm that added to the ownership experience and even generated some loyalty to various brands that they have traded under over the years.

Build quality is however a rather different topic. This covers the quality of the materials used, the attention to details in the design as well as the way it is bolted together. It is something you appreciate during the period of ownership. The 75 is the first car where I find ever more signs of quality. Compare and contract with my experience of the others where familiarity only helped to identifies ever more cost saving features.

Some examples:-

When you open the 75, there is a substantial chromed handle that feels well made and allows you to open a substantial door. When you get in a close the door it does so with a firm clunk not like a tiny Honda, Fiat or (dare I say it, a Rover 100 / 200 / 400 / MGF).

When at the wheel, the indicator stalks appear substantial (that word again) and in just the right position and rich in functionality. Compare and contrast with the stalks in the other MG/Rovers that appear to be a freebie that fell out of a Japanese packet of cornflakes.

You then cast your eyes over the central console and blow me, the tape, radio, satnav and CD player, climate control are all neatly laid out into a single unit with buttons that are designed for humans and that appear totally logical and intuitive after a couple of weeks ownership. Compare and contrast with the rest of the range where the radio is some grim Chinese din device that is covered in tiny buttons and garish LEDs that are impossible for any human over 2 foot tall to operate!

I could go on, but life is too short. The 75 shouts quality over the long term, that is why it appears at the top of the owner satisfaction tables and the other Rover products do not.

I confess I also feel compelled to question your thought that "The ZS is for someone who lives being MG". MGs are open 2 seat sports cars and that is the only way to enjoy the experience of MG motoring. That is why we have an F! The rest are rebadged Rovers, perhaps with stiffer springs but that does not deliver the MG experience!

Cheers

Patrick

PS I am worried that you would think that we would have Harvey's Bristol Cream in the house, unless you think I have live-in servants! I assure you I have no servants or, therefore, do not have this strange confection you mentioned!
Patrick Beet

So, Patrick, when you state that MGs are open two seaters and that is the only way to enjoy MG motoring, are you suggesting that all MG badged saloons and GT's going back to 1927 were not part of the Safety Fast MG experience?


Of course, the Rover is for the older gentleman? But then that's a personal opinion, too!
Martin

>>>>>>>>>MGs are open 2 seat sports cars and that is the only way to enjoy the experience of MG motoring. That is why we have an F! The rest are rebadged Rovers, perhaps with stiffer springs but that does not deliver the MG experience!<<<<<<<<<


What a load of crap. In that case, your MGF is nothing more than a re-bodied metro. Hardly a sporting basis is it?


Gareth

PS I've driven an MGF and a TF and think very highly of them.
Gareth Kidman

It took quite a while for owners of the older 2 seater MGs to accept the MGF as an MG. Not sure if the archive old some of the comment in the early days..

MGF took a real bashing in the early days, made a change from them bashing Maestros!


Kelv
Kelvin

Folks,

A quick injections of reality here!

I was merely responding to Martin's assertion the "The ZS is for someone who lives being MG"
The reason MG is famous is because of open 2 seat sports cars. If they had never produced this rather specialised type of transport they might be as famous today as Nash or Armstrong or any number of car companies that have faded from the collective memory. The world is interested in MG for open 2 seaters. We do not see any posts from our American colleagues asking for MG to sell then a new Magnette or MG GT (old Austin 1300 with MG Badge) - The MG experience IS open two seaters, not "brand stretch" into rebadged saloons.

Happy New Year to all

Cheers

Patrick
Patrick Beet

>>>>>>>>We do not see any posts from our American colleagues asking for MG to sell then a new Magnette or MG GT (old Austin 1300 with MG Badge) - The MG experience IS open two seaters, not "brand stretch" into rebadged saloons.<<<<<<<<,


That's mainly because most americans do not know that a 4-seater MG sports saloon was/is even available, i know this from personal experience. Because of where i am located in the world, i'm right next to a U.S airbase and i'm often having fun teasing the so called 'fast' american muscle cars. Replace teasing with beating, as i've raced most and won every time. They never knew such a car existed.
Americans are very impressionable, and find it amazing that a 4 seat saloon car can beat their 4-5 litre 2 seater sports coupe. If they knew that a MG car could compete with the Subaru Impreza Turbo and keep up with their V8's, as well as cart the family around, they would buy it. Now, is the ZT available in the USA yet?Could do with a superchargerd KV6 though, rather than a V8 Ford Mustang as that would be cheating.

Gareth
Gareth Kidman

Patrick, I agree, I've had various discussions with folks in South Africa and the US and most assume MG is an open two seater sports cars. Hence they promote the MG TF and Rover 75 in those markets. The Rover 75 sits nicely in the SA & Australian market because they all remember the big Rovers of old. No dilution of historical brand image with the 25 and 45, despite these being excellent cars in their own right!

I Believe M Moore made the assertion on this thread that the ZS is for someone who lives being MG. However, I did react to Patrick's statement, because IMHO, MG can mean many things to different people. In my case, it has always meant spirited driving in a rewarding, safe, performance vehicle. Hence I p'xed my Rover 75 for the MG ZT so that I could have some fun in everyday driving (BTW, Patrick, no offence intended on the Rovers are for old men, just wanted to show that we can disagree :-)).

I also have an MGB so that I can recapture some of the raw driving experience from which we are sadly divorced these days in the modern, sterile machines.

Martin

I have a friend is USA who was here just before Christmas, he bought and now has shipped back to the USA a MG Farina Magnette. (He also owns several 2 seater MGs)

On of his ambitions while over here was also to drive a V6 MG saloon. This he did and was most impressed, and I'm sure he will be spreading the word.

There have been many discussions on this BBS about what MG means, and what is and what is not an MG.

The subject always promotes healthy debate, and it is interesting to read everyones differing views.

I have the ZS180, a ZT was out of my price range, but I will consider perhaps a used ZT in the future.

Kelvin
Kelvin

This thread was discussed between 12/12/2002 and 02/01/2003

MG ZR ZS ZT Technical index

This thread is from the archives. Join the live MG ZR ZS ZT Technical BBS now