ZS Diesels

[timbo48]

Off to have a look at a ZS diesel this weekend and was wondering what they're like. We have a ZT Diesel so I know about MG quality but interested in the engine in this one, is it the same as that in the ZR diesel or an uprated one, the insurance group is higher. Also I seem to remember reading when the Z range came out that the ZS was the best handling one in the range. Is this the case? This one is pre facelift. Any info welcome and thanks in advance.

[timbo48]

Anybody out there?

[Platinum]

Yes, they share the same diesel engine as the ZR (Rover L-series - 100 & 115bhp outputs I think.)

The handling is not quite as sweet as the lighter 1.8l engined car but probably better than most other cars in it's class.

[grahamw48]

Yes, I have a ZS 115+...2005 model, registered 2006.

I also owned a SLDi Rover version for 3 years. Did 100,000 troublefree miles in that time.

To be honest, they're probably the most reliable car you'll ever own.

I only use them as high-mileage workhorses.

Cheap car, lots of toys, brilliant safe handling and 50+mpg day in day out.

Obviously I couldn't care less about whether they're fashionable or not.

This one has done 80,000 now, and only expenditure apart from consumables has been complete set of engine belts at the correct mileage, and a rear hub bearing which was fitted (complete hub on these, as has discs all round) in 30 mins by Kwikfit for less than a hundred quid.

She went straight through the MOT last week again.

For the price of a set of the previous model's injectors, and a bit of setting up, even the 'standard' 99bhp version of the engine will give a reliable 120-130bhp.

Good forum here:

http://forums.mg-rover.org

Edited by grahamw48 on Thursday 3rd February 23:57

[MGJohn]

My wife gets 40+ mpg on her Petrol 1.8 MG ZS. That's not far off Diesel figures. She does not hang about either.

Even I get mid 30s mpg driving it without economy in mind.

Try an example of both petrol and diesel ZS-es and see which car you'd prefer to live with.

I got a Diesel Rover 600 when the petrol prices went potty a few years back. That also has the L-Series engine used in the Diesel ZS. I enjoyed that car but, always nice to get back in the Rover 620ti and damn the fuel costs...

This is Rover's L-Series Diesel in my 600. It is a good motor. Honda used it in the Diesel Accords from the same era.



I fitted a set of Rover Vitesse 17" alloys shod with Avons all round which definitely improved the handling of this usually sedate driving diesel.



It was no slouch either even by modern diesel standards as the SatNav sometimes confirmed. I am not a Diesel enthusiast but I enjoyed that car for a while.

Yes, the MG ZS is rightly regarded as the best handling of the three Zed cars. Which is saying something as they all handle well. Perhaps the finest overall handling package is the 1.8 engined version rather than the more powerful 180 with the KV6.

Edited by MGJohn on Friday 4th February 00:12

[grahamw48]

Here's mine....scuse rubbish quality of pic. Had cam on wrong setting.

.

Edited by grahamw48 on Friday 4th February 00:22

[timbo48]

Cheers for that everybody, going to have a look at a couple tomorrow. I remember before MGR went bust sitting in a brand new ZS 180 at the local Main Dealers and we both thought that it was a fine car. Now have a ZT and my son is after the ZS. This is after owning various Rover 420GSi's and MG Maestros so I guess you could say we're MGR fans.....

[grahamw48]

Better buy with your head not your heart then.

All the diesel MGs should feel pretty lively...sub 10 secs to 60 when new.

The MAF sensor does go out of tune with age on later cars.

My replacement one cost £59 (same as fitted to Audis), took 5 minutes to fit myself, and restored full performance.

[timbo48]

Any idea what the cambelt change interval is?

[grahamw48]

Around 50,000 mark on the later diesel cars (from memory). Had mine done at 52,000. I paid just over £200 for the full set fitted, including labour.

There'll be some figures on the MGRover forum too.

http://forums.mg-rover.org/showthread.php?t=337676...

Edited by grahamw48 on Friday 4th February 17:14

[timbo48]

Thanks for pointing me in that direction. Of the two I was hoping to look at tomorrow, the one I can't see, dealer off for weekend, has 90ishk miles on it, with the cambelt changed at about 80k. The other one has the same sort of mileage but apparently only the dealer stamps. I imagine that should we buy that one, first thing to do is change the belts. Fuel filter, etc, can come later. Might delay making a dacision until I've seen the other one.

[oO0 Huffy 0Oo]

I think the belts need to be done at 70k...... I had mine done at 60k, and am due to redo them soon at 120k to be on the safe side.

[grahamw48]

Only earlier models had the longer intervals (I've owned both).
See my link above.

Pre-2001 84,000 miles or 7 years.

Post-2001 48,000 miles or 4 years.

The early engines had automatic tensioners, the later ones manual.

[timbo48]

Saw one at weekend, no service history pre 71k, so no evidence of change but I guess that it must have been done as it's on 99k at the moment. Post 71k full service history but no mention of belt change, so probably needs doing right now.

[grahamw48]

There are plenty of good ones about, and probably the best value-for-money vehicle you can buy at the moment, so you can afford to be fussy.

Mine was one-owner, full service history and still a bargain.

Good quality tyres are a plus, because cheap ones can be really noisy and limit the normally superb handling.

[MGJohn]

timbo48 said:

Saw one at weekend, no service history pre 71k, so no evidence of change but I guess that it must have been done as it's on 99k at the moment. Post 71k full service history but no mention of belt change, so probably needs doing right now.

A guess is not good enough. I personally know of one Rover Timing belt that lasted over 90,000 miles. Less caring owner ~ there are such types about ... ...Still looked good when it was changed for a new one.