Most undeserving / overrated classic?

The Toledo aka Dolomite 1300/1500

Dead end eh ? Every recent Rover except the 75, MGF and the indian built Metro replacement were a direct result of the Acclaim deal with Honda

1.7 Itals were surprisingly quick due the lightweight and decent engine, but 60-90 mph the XJ was a lot stronger but nothing like as quick as the S type and 420 it replaced.

dilbert ( snipped-for-privacy@east.cheam.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

Yep, a very sad end to the Triumph badge.

AIUI, the 45 is basically a Rover design, but with some components from Honda sources, available rebadged for a while as a Honda Civic. The 25 is a completely Rover design.

The 45 is the Honda Dominai? Or something like that. Except in Honda form it has double wishbone suspension, as did the non-UK Concerto. Apparently.

The bulkhead of the 25/45 was most definitely derived from the Concerto/Civic based 200/400, themselves an evolution of the Ballade-based 213/216. IIRC the rear suspension of the 25 owes more to the Maestro!

Richard (the MGF is about the most pure Rover design you'll find).

Sorry but no....Ive owned a 420 manual overdrive and my injection 4.2 auto is a LOT faster. I didnt expect this and maybe mine is a good'un but there it is. The 420 doenst have a particulalry good carb setup IIRC, The E typre and 420G have triple SU's. Cant really compare with an E type cos Ive never owned one and its a lot lighter anyway. I agree the 60-90 overtake in the series 3 is particulalry lively. Its also deceptive as the only indication of speed difference is the needle positions and the scenery passing quicker. The noise is the same. While the 420 is refined for its day, its isnt anywhere near as good as the S3 Now compared to an SD1 I agree with Dave the injected Vitesse should in theory be more economical. My S3 averages about 20...the 2600 SD1 manual I had used to do about 25. FWIW the p6 with SD1 5 speed box is better still at 28 but I tend to use it more for long runs only and use a Dolomite as a town car. Jonners

Err, the XJ6 has already a considerable engine size advantage - going to the XJ 12 would be silly. And make the fuel consumption even worse. The Montego Turbo is many years newer than the SDI which is a '70s design.

Well, you would be refreshed because of all the stops for petrol in the XJ6. ;-)

I'm not knocking the XJ6 - I had one - but the SD1 is fine for long distance journeys. I've use it many times to drive to Aberdeen - usually with just one short stop. I've not got a Vitesse, though, but an EFI which hasn't as firm suspension.

I'm only really comparing motorway cruising as other types of driving depends so much on traffic etc to make it difficult to compare directly. My EFI auto does lower thirties at legal speeds. Overall, I shudder to think as I do a fair bit of London driving. I do know the carburettor XJ6

4.2 was horrendous in town - not helped by the auto choke. I'd expect the EFI to be much better.

In news: snipped-for-privacy@argonet.co.uk, Dave Plowman decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows

I used to use my SD1 Vitesse for travelling from Liverpool to Newmarket (207 miles) most weekends. 85ish mph, 5th gear, 35mpg. Koni suspension kit, slightly lowered, no self levelling, dead comfy on a run.

once used a 2000 mile old 1.3 Fiesta to do the same run, did the same kinda speeds, took the same amount of time but I got out pretty fatigued.

The noise levels, the lack of ride quality and the lack of midrange punch made it a much more miserable trip in the Fiesta, and because I was trying to stick to a steady 85ish, I only saved about 7 quid over the entire return journey. Rover = 2200ish rpm, Fiesta 4400ish.

I was much more bored in the Fiesta as well, didn't have the Rovers brilliant trip computer to keep me entertained.

Sorry - done it again....

Re the Citroens - the Xantia is far better built and in many ways better, but so anonymous - just another Eurobox. The turning circle is not as good as the BX, and the thick pillars restrict visibility. None of the quirky bits you expect from a Citroen, just - well, a means of transport.

Geoff MacK

The injected Series III was considerably quicker and less thirsty than the earlier carb vesions, but I don't have actual figures to hand.

I'm only quoting personal experience of two specific cars, so it's entirely possible that my Jaguar was a particularly nice one - certainly the quietest one I ever drove - and the Rover was a Friday afternoon jobbie. Probably not a fair comparison. On petrol consumtion the Jaguar averaged 17mpg on mostly urban driving and 21 on a run, whereas the Rover rarely even got into double figures on my commute!

Geoff MacK

Yes - it was a similar improvement as the carb SD1 to the EFI - perhaps more so given the auto choke arrangement on the XJ6.

If the Jag only did 21 on a motorway run at legal speeds, it was well over

10 mpg shy of the Vitesse. Nor have I ever seen single figures on the highly accurate trip computer of my EFI - apart from instantaneous readings. Lowest it ever averages is 15 or so with much rush hour driving.

That your example of the Vitesse used so much fuel meant it was seriously faulty which would account for the poor performance as well.

But they were all shit. If I wanted a Honda I would buy a Honda, they're almost certainly better built as well as being more stylish and desirable in every way. You might disagree with that, but the Acclaim was the last 'Triumph' car and I don't believe anyone could say that was a worthy finale.

At the time the Acclaim was current I worked for a large company which handed out company cars pretty well according to what you wanted up to half your salary - provisos were four seats and not Japanese. That's why I had three AlfaSuds on the trot, then a Guilietta. One of the guys bought an Acclaim (not Japanese?) and I couldn't believe how awful it was. Not practical - tried to be a four seat saloon but was nearer to a 2+2. Horrible thrashy engine which needed at least another two gears to get the revs down on the motorway. A terribly sad end to Triumph.

In the same vein, one of the other guys bought an MGB GT. One of the last ones made. Oh, how on earth could they sell that thing?

Geoff MacK

: The Rover 800, despite using the same theory of Japanese design, somehow : managed to be utterly awful.

I remember seeing one of those new car reliability surveys when the Rover-Honda tie up was in place. The Honda version of one car (Sterling?) was the most reliable ... the Rover built version of teh same thing was the least.

And people wonder where the British car industry went.

Ian

Honda did not build the UK market 825/Sterling for Rover the reverse is true early Honda Legends for the uk market were built by Rover both were assembled using the same engines and gearbox units straight from Japan. I also suspect you misread the survey the Rover 4 cylinder versions (except perhaps the 820e ) were/are generally more reliable than the Honda V6 versions -- in particularly the 2.5 litre version -- however the the later

827 2.7 V6 was a big improvement and a good if still gutless car, Honda claimed 177 bhp for this engine but it didn't feel like it especially when compared to the 4 cylinder M16 mpi powered versions which only claimed 138 bhp and felt like it had more.

The later Rover KV6 had (has???) many faults was a disaster in the 800, but that was when Rover were under BMW control.

For the record the main problems with 800 range all of which were all fixed by before the Series 2

All early series 1 models -- electrical niggles mainly relating to the Italian made instruments, paint flaking,.

Earl series 1 Honda powered 825/Sterling camshaft/tappet wear, and if corners have been cut on servicing oil presure problems, water circulation problems due to undersized waterways also expect problems with Hondamatic gearbox if fluid has not been changed every 4 years/48k miles.

All early 820 models -- short cam belt life due to early cars having the alt ernator driven off camshaft (fixed long before end of series 1)

Early Series 1 4 cylinder 820e and 820Se with Motorola single point injection -- loss of ecu settings if battery disconnected.

Series 2 --- Most problems cured Honda power unit in 827 is much better than 825 but still requires regular changes of vital fluids and although improved tappets still get a bit noisy at high mileages. In the 820 a few electrical niggles remain but no more so than in the equivalent Granada/Volvo. All 4 cylinder 16valve models still tend to weep small amounts oil from the cylinder head gasket.

: Honda did not build the UK market 825/Sterling for Rover

Sorry, I forgot to mention that it was a US survey: Honda Sterling at the top, Rover Sterling at the bottom.

Ian

From memory US market Sterlings were built by Honda in Japan

In news:cCUlhtvFIYkV-pn2-dDmly0Dd4bd8@localhost, Ian Johnston decided to enlighten our sheltered souls with a rant as follows

Even after I vented my spleen the other day about the awfulness of the Rover

800, my mate went and bought one on Friday. P reg 820SLi. £550.

I drove it today.

Slow, noisy engine, rattling doors, ABS light with a mind of it's own. Awful ride quality, awful seats.

Rides, handles, brakes, accelerates, and is smaller inside than the 164. Has more rust than the 164. Hmm, I hope the 75 doesn't go the same way. I'd quite a V6 75 in a few years.

Good points.

Nice dash illumination, nice gearchange.