Go Back   The 75 and ZT Owners Club Forums > The 75 and ZT Owners Club Forums > The 75 and ZT Owners Club General Forum
Register FAQ Image Gallery Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read
Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 13th July 2021, 02:21   #11
Ahrle
Newbie
 
Ahrle's Avatar
 
Morris ZT-T 190+

Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Åre
Posts: 18
Thanks: 5
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by vitesse View Post
And if you wish to test your VIS motors you could use the freeware programme Toaf which is very handy, covers most things, and is easy to use, or borrow a simple tester from me. I generally have a few reconditioned "Stocktake" VIS motors here in Gävle, superior to standard ones and sold at cost on an exchange basis.

Regards

Most welcome to say hello on here too ... https://www.facebook.com/groups/1800705170206717
Thank you for the offer! My VIS'es are undoubtedly toast, though. They sound almost like rod knock and the motor's powerless under 4000rpm. Will replace once vacation's over

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Trident View Post
The British horses are smaller ?
Haha, that's a good one Not without point though; ZS 180 seems to be a ZS 174, making me curious if ZT really delivers those +16bhp from that same motor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MGJohn View Post
Interesting topic.

On this subject, I was told by someone I trust with high level Longbridge connections that the reason MG-Rover did not put the K4 1.8T in the smaller MG ZS is that it would make the top of the range V6 less attractive and thus undermine its sales. Owners of both ZT 1.8Ts and MG6s with the very similar engine have had them mapped to produce around 200ps/bhp.

Having much experience of the 1.8T in both MG ZTs, ZT-Ts and even MG6s, I can fully understand that.

When I first entered MG ZT ownership all those years ago, I read here on this site something which really surprised me. Those with far more hands on driving and tools experience with these cars, were of the opinion that of all the engine options available for the 75/ZTs, overall the 1.8T was considered the best option, yes, even better option than the BMW Diesel engine cars unless you were a high mileage motorway muncher. My 1.8Ts get around 40 mpg on Motorway runs driven with economy in mind. It's thirty odd years since my job involved high mileages. Back then as far as the 1970s, my firm picked up the Fuel Costs...I could use as much fuel as I wanted privately too. However, there was a catch, my job was so demanding and involved high motorway mileages, on arrival back home I was too tired to do any more driving.

With the passing of those years, I can understand that 1.8T viewpoint now.

A healthy ZT V6 190 should be a performance match for the BMW of similar engine and car size. The 3-series is a much smaller car.
Interesting! Rover seemingly learned their head gasket lesson from earlier models Not sure how well the 1.8's handle tuning, but I bet a ZS AWD could have been a tempting WRX alternative in its day.

1.8t may sure have been the best alternative, roadlegal tuning should be easier too The sound of that KV6 though...

Just noticed how close the ZT is to the E39 in size. Hm... Thought the 75 was meant to fit between the 3 and 5 series?

Quote:
Originally Posted by bl52krz View Post
Hi Dave. I think he means that on paper? The Zt-t is slower. I don’t think he means that his car is slower than it should be. I think he compared the stats, and wondered why comparable output made the ZT-t slower. I may be wrong tho.
Correct My car is slower as well, but at least it looks fast standing still
Ahrle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2021, 07:41   #12
bikerdude666
Posted a thing or two
 
Jaguar Xe diseasal

Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Little Stanion, Corby
Posts: 1,922
Thanks: 363
Thanked 390 Times in 241 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ahrle View Post

Haha, that's a good one Not without point though; ZS 180 seems to be a ZS 174, making me curious if ZT really delivers those +16bhp from that same motor.
I may be wrong but I was under the impression that the 190, 180, 160 etc was actually PS, rather than BHP, which is essentially imperial horsepower being slightly less than PS, which is a german equivalent (I think).
bikerdude666 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2021, 11:57   #13
Kearton
Gets stuck in
 
MG ZT-T CDTi

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sunny Suffolk
Posts: 607
Thanks: 1
Thanked 16 Times in 13 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bikerdude666 View Post
I may be wrong but I was under the impression that the 190, 180, 160 etc was actually PS, rather than BHP, which is essentially imperial horsepower being slightly less than PS, which is a german equivalent (I think).
Yes, 1 PS, or metric horsepower, =135.5 Watts, and 1K bhp = 745.7 Watts (Wikipedia).

The later 75/ZT diesel engine is 132 PS = 129 bhp. The 135 part of its name is from rounding up of the PS value. also, values do vary with production tolerances and settings. On a dyno before its upgrade, mine was measured at 132.5 bhp (= 134.3 PS).
Kearton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2021, 12:02   #14
kaiser
This is my second home
 
kaiser's Avatar
 
75 Tourer 2.5 Auto, 1.8T, 75V8ZT

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Johannesburg ZA
Posts: 6,200
Thanks: 1
Thanked 859 Times in 613 Posts
Default

Slow on paper. ??


The car is slow on anything!
__________________
Worth his V8 in gold
kaiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2021, 12:07   #15
Ahrle
Newbie
 
Ahrle's Avatar
 
Morris ZT-T 190+

Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Åre
Posts: 18
Thanks: 5
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bikerdude666 View Post
I may be wrong but I was under the impression that the 190, 180, 160 etc was actually PS, rather than BHP, which is essentially imperial horsepower being slightly less than PS, which is a german equivalent (I think).
Yep there's a slight difference (here we really can say German horses are smaller ):

ZS 2.5: 174 bhp/177 PS
ZT 2.5: 188 bhp/190 PS
Ahrle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2021, 12:09   #16
Kearton
Gets stuck in
 
MG ZT-T CDTi

Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Sunny Suffolk
Posts: 607
Thanks: 1
Thanked 16 Times in 13 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ahrle View Post

Just noticed how close the ZT is to the E39 in size. Hm... Thought the 75 was meant to fit between the 3 and 5 series?
I recall reading before I bought my ZT-T that BMW had insisted that MGR used the same wheelbase as the equivalent 5 series (E39?) of the time (possibly to help the comparison below), and that MGR had wanted it to be slightly bigger, to provide better rear leg room.

I also read that they wanted to see whether a front wheel drive car could be made to handle like a rear wheel drive car. They didn't quite achive it, but the 75/ZT is closer to that ideal than any other car of the period that I've driven, and also quite a few later FWD cars.

I think that the size comparison they stated was that the 75's size would be between the 600/Montego and the 800.

Last edited by Kearton; 13th July 2021 at 12:13..
Kearton is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2021, 12:13   #17
bl52krz
This is my second home
 
bl52krz's Avatar
 
Rover 75 cdt club + Rover 2.5 KV6 Conni SE

Join Date: May 2008
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 11,356
Thanks: 6,587
Thanked 2,262 Times in 1,729 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaiser View Post
Slow on paper. ??


The car is slow on anything!
I imagine that people do not buy a tourer for ‘best’ speed, but for its carrying capacity? I don’t know how the ZT-T compares on that score. Never really fancied one. Plus, how often are you after the ultimate top speed on a motor vehicle? It’s all academic really. You pays your money, and take your pick.
__________________
Great Barr, Birmingham.
bl52krz is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2021, 15:55   #18
kaiser
This is my second home
 
kaiser's Avatar
 
75 Tourer 2.5 Auto, 1.8T, 75V8ZT

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Johannesburg ZA
Posts: 6,200
Thanks: 1
Thanked 859 Times in 613 Posts
Default

i am not talking speed. I am talking being slow to respond unless you flatten the pedal to the metal!
It is quite annoying at times, with the automatic. If you want to nip in a gap, it is either annoyingly slow, causing the chap behind inconvenience, or it is two gears down and a growl.
The most important thing for a street car is amble torque, and this car has simply not got it! without letting all the horses out the stable at once.

My wife was driving the 1.8T and I the V6 once, and I booted the V6 just to follow the 1.8T! And my wife is not normally a fast driver!

Using the speed control, and hitting a hill, the car goes out of lock up then into fourth and then into 3rd, just to maintain 100kph. And then slips into 4th again almost immediately. It is just so overblown and dramatic.
My 3.5 just plods along, hill or no hill. It stays in 3rd, almost without exception, unless the hill is really really steep.
And buying an estate for me was simply a matter of practicability and good looks. I think, that the 75 in estate form is about the smartest estate I have ever seen. The others I liked was the Sierra, the Volvo 240 (?) and the Chrysler 300. So for me it was a choice of a good looking car!
And no, I don't expect my estate to be any slower than a sedan, why on earth should I??
My bags of cement and engine assemblies, prams, clocks, tape recorders and tools deserve to go 120mph, if I choose. Otherwise I would have bought the other estate I like. This one!
__________________
Worth his V8 in gold
kaiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2021, 17:04   #19
Ahrle
Newbie
 
Ahrle's Avatar
 
Morris ZT-T 190+

Join Date: Jun 2021
Location: Åre
Posts: 18
Thanks: 5
Thanked 2 Times in 2 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaiser View Post
Slow on paper. ??


The car is slow on anything!
Really though?

Engine-wise, it should be a normal performer for a late 90's 2.5 n/a. Same output as A4 2.8, BMW 2.5/2.8's, MB C280 (all had 190-193PS and 245 or 280Nm). I'm more curious why the ZTT appears slower than all of these, when it really shouldn't be. Third gear seems like a major achilles heel, compared to BMW's.

The problem I experience (with bad VISes) is that it's completely gutless under 4000 rpm. Almost dangerous to drive nicely. Tried out the daily '92, 130hp Accord after five days with the ZTT. It literally made me screech in joy. The low gearing and bottom-end torque made it feel like an Evo in comparison.

An inspirational ride later, however, I do get the impression the ZTT's engine lives on the revs. Keep it over 4000 rpm all the time, on a twistier road, and it's hard not to smile. Ol' Honda would not stand a chance. It seems, again with bad VIS'es, what matters is to continously keep it at the power band (it's an all or nothing scenario really).

Quote:
Originally Posted by kaiser View Post
i am not talking speed. I am talking being slow to respond unless you flatten the pedal to the metal!
Oh yeah, ol' sleepy automatics...

Have you checked the spec difference between auto and manual? It can be huuuuge! Used to have an A4 2.8, clocking 0-60 in about 7 seconds with the manual, and 9.5 as automatic (which in my case weighed in at an unbelievable 1.73 tons!).

But let's forget about speed and hand over that Morris

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kearton View Post
I recall reading before I bought my ZT-T that BMW had insisted that MGR used the same wheelbase as the equivalent 5 series (E39?) of the time (possibly to help the comparison below), and that MGR had wanted it to be slightly bigger, to provide better rear leg room.

I also read that they wanted to see whether a front wheel drive car could be made to handle like a rear wheel drive car. They didn't quite achive it, but the 75/ZT is closer to that ideal than any other car of the period that I've driven, and also quite a few later FWD cars.

I think that the size comparison they stated was that the 75's size would be between the 600/Montego and the 800.
That is interesting! Watched several reviews prior to purchase. Some claim it was built off the E36, others the E46, and had troubles competing because it couldn't compare in size with neither 3 nor 5 series.

From my understandings (I never looked myself), R75 got a propshaft tunnel already from the start. Curious why it ended up FWD to begin with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by bl52krz View Post
I imagine that people do not buy a tourer for ‘best’ speed, but for its carrying capacity? I don’t know how the ZT-T compares on that score. Never really fancied one. Plus, how often are you after the ultimate top speed on a motor vehicle? It’s all academic really. You pays your money, and take your pick.
For me personally:

- Preferred it over the Oldsmobile-length butt of the saloon (unsure if that's just an illusion from pictures)
- Needed space for an amp and 15" woofer sitting in the garage, which was the initial reason of purchasing another car... which turned out not to fit anyway
- Had an elderly owner obviously loving the car, which had to make room for a convertible.
- It was £800 cheaper than a saloon 2.5 V6, in worse shape; £1100 cheaper than a facelift 1.8t, that I would consider if it had a 2.5; and even £300 cheaper than a 75 tourer... this with new timing belts, tires, wheel alignment, and £300 yearly tax just paid


I do miss optional extras, like rear power windows, trip computer and cargo net. Weight savings though

Last edited by Ahrle; 13th July 2021 at 17:16..
Ahrle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 13th July 2021, 17:17   #20
kaiser
This is my second home
 
kaiser's Avatar
 
75 Tourer 2.5 Auto, 1.8T, 75V8ZT

Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Johannesburg ZA
Posts: 6,200
Thanks: 1
Thanked 859 Times in 613 Posts
Default

Compare torque, not power
Torque is Alfa and Omega in a road car.
The Rover V6 simply has not got it!.
Compare to a straight six BMW or anything!! else.
Bottom last!
__________________
Worth his V8 in gold
kaiser is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:02.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © 2006-2023, The Rover 75 & MG ZT Owners Club Ltd