Shock Absorbers - rear - differences between mg zt and rover 75

TriciaS · 9th March 2015, 18:45

Can anyone tell me once and for all what is the difference in the rear shocks between the MG and the Rover 75, I notice that on the Rimmer Bros website they show the complete unit for the MG but only the damper for the 75 with the other bits separate but when they are made up they look the same and it does not explain why some are not suitable for the MG, obviously any on Ebay are charging more for the MG but is there any real reason I cannot use the 75 on my MG.
Any help greatly appreciated.

chris75 · 9th March 2015, 18:57

The MG ones will be stiffer for "sportier" handling whereas the Rover ones are soft for comfort .

If you use Rover ones , your car will not behave like an MG

Not sure why the MG ones are sold complete with top mounts , but you may well find that your old ones are pretty well rusted and wish you had changed them anyway .
Mind you , some would say that the Rover ride is better ...................

TriciaS · 9th March 2015, 21:10

Thanks for reply, I am not that keen on a sporty ride so I might get some of the rover ones, it just seems strange that the rimmer website has some that say for MG ZT & MGZT-T so obviously no difference in saloon or estate and some say not for MG ZT but they do not actually say the words Rover 75 on any and if buying on ebay some are showing the complete shock like the MG ZT ones but saying Rover 75 so I just wanted to make sure I can but any type and apart from not being a hard or firm ride they will not affect the handling, I am thinking of getting smaller wheels and proper old fashioned tyres instead of these enormous flat modern things as I think they give the hard ride.

kraanc · 10th March 2015, 12:20

As i wanted to go from ZT early standart setup, wich is pretty sporty, i changed springs to later ones sport comfort. But the shock absorbers on rear is Rover 75s, as old ones was shot.
The difference - with zt shocks on the bumps rear stopped moving little bit faster and stiffer. Rover shocks gives a bit smoother and softer/slower absorbtion. And if going fast on very rough road, with Rover shocks car bounces less from wheel to wheel. But still no handling issue on everyday driving.

TriciaS · 10th March 2015, 14:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by kraanc

As i wanted to go from ZT early standart setup, wich is pretty sporty, i changed springs to later ones sport comfort. But the shock absorbers on rear is Rover 75s, as old ones was shot.
The difference - with zt shocks on the bumps rear stopped moving little bit faster and stiffer. Rover shocks gives a bit smoother and softer/slower absorbtion. And if going fast on very rough road, with Rover shocks car bounces less from wheel to wheel. But still no handling issue on everyday driving.

thanks for your reply, very helpful information as I needed to know if any problems caused by using different shocks to springs, I now know I can buy rover 75 and get a smoother ride but I will keep springs the same until they wear out or break then change them too to 75's, what size wheel and tyre do you use as I am thinking of going rover 75 wheels /tyres but worried if they look silly at all

kraanc · 11th March 2015, 08:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by TriciaS

thanks for your reply, very helpful information as I needed to know if any problems caused by using different shocks to springs, I now know I can buy rover 75 and get a smoother ride but I will keep springs the same until they wear out or break then change them too to 75's, what size wheel and tyre do you use as I am thinking of going rover 75 wheels /tyres but worried if they look silly at all

So setup on my ZT-T 190 is:

All Sport comfort springs (red/brown - brown color code)
front shock absorbers of early standart (sportier ones,but changing soon).
rear shock absorbers from Rover 75 tourer (fitted well).
on 18" original straigt wheels and 225/45 tyre.

As the front brake discs is 190s 260s, i can't go to smaller rims, and don't want to. ride is firm but fairly comfortable. I would like it to feel a bit softer though

But You should carefully check compatibility, if You change to smaller rims.
Oh and as i changed from ZT-T shocks to 75 tourer shocks, there was no big difference in lenght, but maybe other rover 75 shocks are longer than Zts, as the springs ar longer too... not sure on this.
My brother on his Audi has this problem, that fitted lowering springs but left original shocks on, and on bigger bumps it "hits shock through" as the shock absorber is too long for the spring.

9th March 2015, 18:45	#1
TriciaS Newbie MG ZT-T 2.0 CDTI Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sutton St James Posts: 29 Thanks: 9 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Shock Absorbers - rear - differences between mg zt and rover 75 Can anyone tell me once and for all what is the difference in the rear shocks between the MG and the Rover 75, I notice that on the Rimmer Bros website they show the complete unit for the MG but only the damper for the 75 with the other bits separate but when they are made up they look the same and it does not explain why some are not suitable for the MG, obviously any on Ebay are charging more for the MG but is there any real reason I cannot use the 75 on my MG. Any help greatly appreciated.

9th March 2015, 18:57	#2
chris75 same car since 2005 2001 Rover 75 2.0 v6 Connoisseur Saloon Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Ellesmere Port , Cheshire Posts: 3,811 Thanks: 379 Thanked 549 Times in 466 Posts	The MG ones will be stiffer for "sportier" handling whereas the Rover ones are soft for comfort . If you use Rover ones , your car will not behave like an MG Not sure why the MG ones are sold complete with top mounts , but you may well find that your old ones are pretty well rusted and wish you had changed them anyway . Mind you , some would say that the Rover ride is better ................... __________________ Who said it was simples ? Last edited by chris75; 9th March 2015 at 19:26..

9th March 2015, 21:10	#3
TriciaS Newbie MG ZT-T 2.0 CDTI Join Date: May 2010 Location: Sutton St James Posts: 29 Thanks: 9 Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post	Thanks for reply, I am not that keen on a sporty ride so I might get some of the rover ones, it just seems strange that the rimmer website has some that say for MG ZT & MGZT-T so obviously no difference in saloon or estate and some say not for MG ZT but they do not actually say the words Rover 75 on any and if buying on ebay some are showing the complete shock like the MG ZT ones but saying Rover 75 so I just wanted to make sure I can but any type and apart from not being a hard or firm ride they will not affect the handling, I am thinking of getting smaller wheels and proper old fashioned tyres instead of these enormous flat modern things as I think they give the hard ride.

10th March 2015, 12:20	#4
kraanc Loves to post MG ZT-T 190 2.5 V6 2003 manual Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: Riga Posts: 349 Thanks: 49 Thanked 14 Times in 11 Posts	As i wanted to go from ZT early standart setup, wich is pretty sporty, i changed springs to later ones sport comfort. But the shock absorbers on rear is Rover 75s, as old ones was shot. The difference - with zt shocks on the bumps rear stopped moving little bit faster and stiffer. Rover shocks gives a bit smoother and softer/slower absorbtion. And if going fast on very rough road, with Rover shocks car bounces less from wheel to wheel. But still no handling issue on everyday driving.