Should the ZT have a bit more welly than I was expecting?

[gizmo_the_great]

Hi

Further to my initial post, I am new to MG car ownership following in my Dads footsteps.

Having inheritted his MG Rover ZT, 2.5ltr v6, I was excited to see how it runs. It's certainly a nice drive, and makes a great sound, but for a 2.5 litre, I was surprised it didn't have a bit more acceleration to it.

I'm posting here to ask whether this may be due to the car itself or whether it's just my expectations being out of whack. I also own a 3.0 litre BMW 330i Sports, and despite being 16 years old, it is like a rocket!! If I press the accelerator a fair amount, it generally stops down a gear or two and then accelerates like a bat out of hell. Not so with the MG ZT.

I realise 2.5 litres is not the same as 3.0 litres, but it's not far off. Am I comparing apples and oranges or should the ZT have a bit more welly than I describe? Is it perhaps a bit like comparing a 1000CC Harley Davidson to a 1000CC Japanese bike? Same engine size but designed for totally different things?

[TomRS]

Originally Posted by gizmo_the_great

Hi

Further to my initial post, I am new to MG car ownership following in my Dads footsteps.

Having inheritted his MG Rover ZT, 2.5ltr v6, I was excited to see how it runs. It's certainly a nice drive, and makes a great sound, but for a 2.5 litre, I was surprised it didn't have a bit more acceleration to it.

I'm posting here to ask whether this may be due to the car itself or whether it's just my expectations being out of whack. I also own a 3.0 litre BMW 330i Sports, and despite being 16 years old, it is like a rocket!! If I press the accelerator a fair amount, it generally stops down a gear or two and then accelerates like a bat out of hell. Not so with the MG ZT.

I realise 2.5 litres is not the same as 3.0 litres, but it's not far off. Am I comparing apples and oranges or should the ZT have a bit more welly than I describe?

The KV6 190 is a slow engine, a 160 mapped diesel will keep pace until over 100mph, and even then not much in it.

They really arent that quick, they do like revs and will move ok upwards of 4000rpm but no.. your not wrong.
Unless the VIS motors are broken then thats it.. its slow haha!

There's a link on here on how to check VIS motors i cant find it, someone will post it.
You should feel a "surge" i use that term lightly at about 4500rpm when the power vis opens.

Im currently looking into performance options but this engine is very much dead in the tuning world.
Sprintex did make a supercharger kit but they no longer make them and are rarer then rocking horse poo to find now.

They are more of a cruiser then anything i've found, which does annoy me as if that was the case why put a short ratio box on the 190 as it really isnt a "sporty" car.

[Elliott]

if its an Auto put it in sports mode and let the revs rise till she's singing to get some nice horsepower

[Snetty]

Originally Posted by gizmo_the_great

Hi

Further to my initial post, I am new to MG car ownership following in my Dads footsteps.

Having inheritted his MG Rover ZT, 2.5ltr v6, I was excited to see how it runs. It's certainly a nice drive, and makes a great sound, but for a 2.5 litre, I was surprised it didn't have a bit more acceleration to it.

I'm posting here to ask whether this may be due to the car itself or whether it's just my expectations being out of whack. I also own a 3.0 litre BMW 330i Sports, and despite being 16 years old, it is like a rocket!! If I press the accelerator a fair amount, it generally stops down a gear or two and then accelerates like a bat out of hell. Not so with the MG ZT.

I realise 2.5 litres is not the same as 3.0 litres, but it's not far off. Am I comparing apples and oranges or should the ZT have a bit more welly than I describe? Is it perhaps a bit like comparing a 1000CC Harley Davidson to a 1000CC Japanese bike? Same engine size but designed for totally different things?

It is very difficult to judge what you were expecting but it is entirely possible that the vis motors have failed.

[gizmo_the_great]

TomRS : thanks for the explanation. That makes some sense. My Dad was never a speed freak. More of a quality drive seeker. So maybe that is the reason - it's just not a speed machine.

I have tried it using the manual gears (3 and 4 at least), and there is a bit of a boost for sure when compared to automatic, but all the same, not massive.

Excuse the ignorance, but what are the VIS Motors?

[Robson Rover Repair]

Could be a 2.5 160 with dead vis motors would make it feel very slow.

[solarsailor]

Originally Posted by gizmo_the_great

...for a 2.5 litre, I was surprised it didn't have a bit more acceleration to it.

My experience was quite the opposite. When I bought my 1.8T recently I thought 'big, heavy car so don't expect much in the way of performance' but when the turbo kicked in it took off like a greased weasel. Certainly quicker than the 2.2L 3 series BMW auto I owned a few years back.

[Jules]

The VIS motors fail from as early as 50k miles

[gizmo_the_great]

Please will someone explain what the VIS motors are? My cars done 102K from memory.

[gizmo_the_great]

variable intake system motors...got it. Look easy enough to replace.

Is there a way to test them before replacing them, just to make sure they do need replacing?

And if they do need replacing, is it the "power" (as opposed to "balance") or both ones that I need from here : https://www.dmgrs.co.uk/products/vis...nce-59-50-each ? Or is there somewhere better to buy...ideally somewhere near Derby where I can just drive to and pick it up rather than waiting for post. I read about A R Griffiths Classic Automobiles, Unit 1, Darley Abbey Mills, Darley Abbey, Derby, DE22 1DZ. A good place to call maybe? Anyone used them?