a bit of help please

[adybennett]

Hi at present i have a 180 with the 2.5 v6 0n 2003 pre face lift , i am thinking of moving her on and going for a 2005 face lift 180 with the
1800 engine would you advise this or stick with my old v6 thanks for any advise

[scotttait]

I guess it's all depending on your circumstances.
Things I would consider

1. Can you afford the running of the v6?
2. Is your current car in good condition
3. Is the new car in better condition.
4. Do you want it just because its the facelift
5. Would you consider a v6 face lift?
6. Could you live without the v6 power and sound etc?

Sorry I can't be much help but put of personal taste I'd stick with v6.

[stamford]

Never owned a mk2 so can't comment but they look good with the kit fitted. However the only documented downsides was they were subject to 'project drive' where MGR cut corners on soundproofing and rust proofing etc. The engine is fine as long as it is looked after. However I suggest you try one before selling up as the V6 is very addictive

If running costs is a factor then the 1.8 will be a bit better but I wouldn't say enough to justify it.

[Smokey]

I'd stick with the V6 if possible. Or get a mk2 180 if costs are fine.

[grimmy]

I have had a mk1 1.8 and a mk2 2.5 and to be honest I would hang on until I could get a mk2 180. I always felt with my 120 I was just settling for it while always wanting the 180. I don't remember fuel economy being that much better and the 60 less horses definatley showed when I stepped up.so I would hang on until a 180 comes up.

[talkingcars]

I agree with what the others have said - Mrs TC has a VVC ZR160 and even with that one notice the loose of power and torque - definatly try the 120 before you buy.

And there is an appricable difference between the mk1 and the mk2 with quality of materials that you can notice, even the carpet makes an appricable difference.

[Mark S]

surely mk2 180's are as cheap if not cheaper than the mk2 1.8?

Always seems to be loads for less than a grand?

[Noobrider]

Love the MK2 look but having had more than our fair share of MG/Rovers through our garage I can say Project drive really kicked in on anything 2003/4 onwards.

Rust, poor quality plastics and clips, everything has a cheaper feel.

Can be a bit of a pain too as so many different parts were fitted to the same models if feels like the parts bins were shuffled round the factory on a daily basis.

The Rover 200/400/800 range were bullet proof and superbly built motors from top to bottom. The 25/45/75 cars and equivilent MG's were very well built with quality materials only slightly below the previous range.

After that the MK2's of the range quality dropped considerably and many are in worse condition than their older counterparts. Whilst the styling was more modern and up to date, I dont feel they represent as good a value.

[petet16]

I agree with the above I had 3 of the R8 style 400's, and they were miles better built than either of our mk2 zs, and also had much better quality carpets and interior trim.