Zs180s not as quick as modern cars now?? - Page 5

Maxfly · 17-10-13, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petet16

I don't see how you can compare the zs whose spec is as the same as it was in 2001 and has been out of production since 2005, with a car built in 2007 that probably cost a great deal more £££ than a zs.

Having made the above statement the 180 always felt short of a few bhp to me, and I'm sure had MGR had a decent budget available they'd have addressed that issue.

Have to say I agree with all the above, I am aware of exactly what the ZS is and its limitations. It is of a different era compared to latest generation hot hatches so I expect them to show me a clean pair of heels

Also going from a ZS with breathing mods to a standard one alway has me thinking how much they feel strangled so that as we know is easy to rectify.

Dan1971 · 17-10-13, 11:26 AM

Cards on the table - I've been looking at the new breed of hot hatches up to a year old.

208 GTi - Fiesta ST 180 - Polo GTi - Fabia VRS - Clio sport.

All of them are around 180 brake - but none any better just under 7 seconds 0-60. Where they do seem better is in terms of refinement, fuel efficiency and co2.

A Polo GTi's quoted worst fuel consumption is 38.

But ....

All of the above - bar the Fabia - are 15K + That is 10 times the cost of my ZS.

And where we wonder about how ours compare against normal looking maotors, I've been keeping an eye on the MG6s at Motorpoint. On their site I've come across a Focus Zetec, pretty average looking, but it has a 1.6 ecotec turbo 180bhp engine fitted !

Jay-ZS+ · 17-10-13, 11:28 AM

Its a 14yr old design (at least) of course it will have been superseded. For reference the nokia 3210 was released the year after the zs was, wouldn't expect that to keep up with the latest generation of mobiles!

I know its a totally different industy but automotive engineering has come on a long way since the zs was designed (or rehashed). Considering that manufactures are having to design with economy in mind power is not the be all and end all. Yet still modern cars have the upper hand on performance whilst still delivering decent mpg (40-50+) compared to the mid 20's of the zs. In truth it does well to put up a decent fight at all.

petet16 · 17-10-13, 11:40 AM

^^^ This is true, the underpinnings of the zs are nearly 20 years old, times change and things move on.

Skillen · 17-10-13, 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by petet16

^^^ This is true, the underpinnings of the zs are nearly 20 years old, times change and things move on.

Not us stuck with our old rovers though!

petet16 · 17-10-13, 12:07 PM

This is true

p_b82 · 17-10-13, 12:47 PM

I remember when Dave put the vag unit in his ZS to start with before he then tweaked it and went for even more bhp. that thing was a monster and will be again when Paul finishes his rebuild of it.

at the time 2.5+V6's were the top of the range and no-one used turbo's as the noise and response is better from nasp, and that is what people wanted. if the supercharger kit had been properly developed by the factory from the off, the ZS would have had 250bhp or so and the comments about it being slow by modern standards would be irrelevant. IMO

It is just one of them things, even with the amount i have spent on the ZS it is still less than a new BMW would be in 325 upwards spec, and that is including the original purchase price of the ZS back in 2004 (9months old ex dealer car) - mine has had it's 10th birthday this year and next april I will have had it for 10years.

there are not many cars built at around the same time that have got quite such an enthusiastic following still, which say as lot to me about the cars.... *shrug*

If I had not decided I wanted a money pit of a project diesel, i would have got a 180, when i was able to afford to run and insure it - now I could i have gone too far with the Diesel to change, and i can't justify a 180 for pottling around the city!

talkingcars · 17-10-13, 05:27 PM

I worked for VW/Audi when the first A3 came out as a driver so I got to drive a lot of VAG products - I feel that the ZS compares well with the cars back then, indeed I could have had a Golf and then a Passat but opted for a maestro and then montego as I preferred the way they drove. Sure- some of the sporty audis were fast but as an all round car I'd rather have my ZS any day.

angry_muppet · 17-10-13, 07:09 PM

I've recently changed to a mk2 vRS and wish MG still made cars like the ZS.
While the vRS is still a quick car, it's just not got the same appeal. Saying that, with a dark grey interior and bright green lighting for the radio my first thought was it would have been gorgeous in an x-power branded limited edition.
I didn't think it was worth selling the the 180, so it's sorned till next year awaiting dad's retirement. Then he'll have fun.

Mat C · 18-10-13, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dan1971

Can't compare a ZS with an S3 Audi. An average van .... Rubbish.

Wasn't comparing the Audi to the MG, i was merely stating that it's the difference between a fast car and an average car. And i'm guessing you havn't driven a modern van? A 1.7tdi Vauxhall Combi or Astramax will easily keep up with or beat a ZR105/ZS110. And my Merc Vito will blast them into the middle of next week. People, honestly you need to realise MG's are just NOT fast, why do you think so many of us resort to tuning the damn things - it's to give us a fleeting chance of keeping up with other cars!!!