[Mike Trident]

Originally Posted by bikerdude666

I wouldn't have a problem with a government funded/part funded company. But I think the motoring press had already pretty much scuppered MGR's chances, the name had a bad reputation, and I don't think, regardless of how much money was invested, people would have seen beyond the badge. Plus, as much as I'd like to see the Rover name alive, they would have had to provide cars that the market place desires, which for me, would mean I would be unlikely to want a modern one anyway, very very few modern cars appeal to me, either interior or exterior, so I'll be keeping the ZT going as long as practical.

It's true, but we like these cars because they are a bit different to the modern cars available.

I'm my opinion, as much as I love my 75. It was actually not a car that was going to save the company. If you think about it, who was it really going to appeal to? The saloon car is not actually very practical, they were underpowered, so not very sporty. The interior is gorgeous, but of limited appeal. You either love it or hate it. Not really much going for it. The build quality is miles ahead of stuff they use to make, but that's all.

The 75 needed more power, at least a 3 litre, it needed cutting edge modern interior not granny's sideboard. Actually if the MG ZT had come out first, with a 3 litre rear wheel drive set up and about 225/250 bhp it would have done much better, more like a Mondeo ST 220. But then it would have been in competition with BMW's own cars, and they weren't going to let that happen. BMW only wanted the Mini brand, not competition. Sadly, Rover went down the road of "nostalgia trip" which will only attract older generations. Probably guided by BMW so as not to take away any sales at all from their own brand, which is understandable.