Oops, I did it again...

Oops, I did it again...

Author
Discussion

bigbadbikercats

Original Poster:

635 posts

214 months

Tuesday 22nd April 2008
quotequote all
Not sure if there's some kind of viral thang at work but I seem to be in the process of acquiring another MG...

ZT 135+ CDT, X-Power Grey (at least I think that's what the colours called, anyway it's an attractive kind of dark gunmetal which makes the thing look discreetly sinister), 03 on a 53 plate, 38K miles, very nice leather/alcantara trim, lots of toys.

OK, so it's not the 260 I was promising myself but then the reason we're getting rid of the Audi A4 2.0T quattro it's going to be replacing is that the costs of owning that were looking a bit bloody silly just for my wife to trundle to work and back, run the boys to guitar lessons etc. while I'm swanning around in the 'F (having more fun than I ever did in the Audi) so the socking great V8 was right out...

As cost efficient family transport with just a hint of attitude I think it's going to do just fine and while it might not have the performance or insane bad-weather, cross country ground covering ability of the A4 in many ways I think the ZT's actually going to prove to be a better (or at least nicer) car. For a start the ride's a heck of a lot better than an Audi on s-line wheels and suspension, and I kind of like the whole "Bentley for the masses" vibe of the thing...

--
JG

Edited by bigbadbikercats on Wednesday 7th May 09:52

wildoliver

8,958 posts

222 months

Thursday 24th April 2008
quotequote all
Very good choice, absurdly cheap for a BMW which is realistically what it is, and a gorgeous engine (and I hate weasels).

968CSReading

3,035 posts

224 months

Wednesday 30th April 2008
quotequote all
Not sure if you are a member of the MG/Rover forum but get a Rover Ron tuning box and MAF kit, makes a huge difference.

bigbadbikercats

Original Poster:

635 posts

214 months

Wednesday 30th April 2008
quotequote all
968CSReading said:
Not sure if you are a member of the MG/Rover forum but get a Rover Ron tuning box and MAF kit, makes a huge difference.
Already been looking at that but since this was a pragmatic purchase I'm minded to just drive the thing around in stock trim for a couple of weeks first and see how I get on with it.

OK, so the Rover Ron box is an awfully cheap way to ~150BHP[1] (and if you get the version with integrated MAFAM it pretty much pays for itself if/when the MAF goes and you don't have to buy an expensive OEM Bosch replacement) and it shouldn't wreck the fuel consumption unless I drive it like a hooligan, but it's (presumably) going to cost me at insurance renewal time.

I have a feeling however that if the power deficit doesn't get to me then the lazy throttle response and reluctance to rev might!

[1] Which I'm guessing will probably make it more than a match for the original V6 version of the 160 if not the turbo variant...

--
JG

Chipchap

2,607 posts

203 months

Thursday 1st May 2008
quotequote all
Fellow near where I live has just bought one of these. He said it was slug slow after his A4.

New MAF + Good diesel + ECU reprogramme from me = wow thats much better


Really inexpensive way into 4 series ownership [between 3 & 5 series size]

CC

968CSReading

3,035 posts

224 months

Friday 2nd May 2008
quotequote all
I had my CDTI from new and was never happy with its performance (I did come from a 163BHP S60 D5).

Sadly the MAF kit and tuning box didnt make a massive difference to my car but I just think it was a duffer. I even brought a completely new MAF but it didnt help. I think it helps to clean the ECU too.

Apart from the performance and poor MPG is was a great car and really surprised me how quick it was A-B. Fuel pumups went in the end so I got shot of it.

bigbadbikercats

Original Poster:

635 posts

214 months

Wednesday 7th May 2008
quotequote all
Well, I picked the ZT on Saturday, spent the bank holiday weekend trundling around locally doing the usual weekend stuff, and drove up to Birmingham yesterday. So far I'm a happy bunny. I haven't missed the performance of the Audi yet (largely I think because the nature of the car encourages a somewhat more laid back approach to driving) but the slightly sluggish throttle response is a little frustrating sometimes so I think the "Rover Ron" box is on the shopping list anyway.

I stand by the comment that it's a nicer car than the Audi and so far at least haven't seen anything to persuade me that it's not as good a car as the Audi - sure the interior doesn't have the cutting edge chic of the A4 but there's nothing wrong with the quality in terms of materials, fit, and finish and in it's own slightly retro way it's just as nice a place to be. It looks great on the drive or in the car park (my father-in-law thought I'd bought a Jag when he first saw it through the window!) and I'm over the moon that I've been able to slash great bleeding chunks of our motoring budget and still feel good about what I'm driving. I really do think that at current prices these things (or the Rover 75 equivalent if that's what floats your boat) are the bargain of the decade.

Oh, and I'm even more convinced that it really is a Bentley for poor people.

Final random thought: I know there are a hundred reasons why it could/would never have happened, and I know it wouldn't necessarily have had wide appeal but I've been daydreaming about what it would have been like if they could have dropped BMWs big twin-turbo 6 cylinder diesel engine into the MG/Rover 260/V8 RWD chassis... smile

--
JG