Free Rover spares

That is just so strange that all that stuff is just lying there doing nothing with loads of the equipment still on and cars still hanging on the production line!. How much money's worth is lying in that place? And what will happen to it all? It's bizarre.

"gazzafield" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@pipex.net...

When I think we visited the place in the early eighties as they were making metros, and you could barely move without bumping into someone/thing. It's sad.

Steve

In news:erki9a$llh$ snipped-for-privacy@news.datemas.de, shazzbat wittered on forthwith;

I wouldn't say its that sad, just a good indication of what happens when bean counters take over a company and trade unions have too much power. Rover in the 1960s built brilliant cars, the P5 and P6 were excellent - the P6 was the car that set the trend for the "executive compact" crap like 3 series BMs and Passats. I had a P6 3500 and it was great.

In the 1970s they had the brilliant SD1 - but couldn't build it properly because of Red Robbo and his cronies. This was the beginning of the end. I had an SD1 Vitesse and I wish I still had it now.

In the 1980s they were in trouble, the Rover 800 was just a re-bodied Honda and didn't have enough suspension travel to ever be comfy, the interior had turned Japanese dull with a bit of veneer nailed on here and there. I had an

The '90s could have been good. The 75 was a great car, but Bernd Pischetsreider savaged Longbridge for being crap the day it was released and stole its thunder.

Unfortunately building stuff like the Rover 45 10 years after its sell by date was never going to help, the City Rover thing was just a joke, the 25 was priced way too high - that was meant to be the Metro replacement but was priced with stuff like the Focus. The MG TF drives really well but looks like it should come with a free set of clippers in the glovebox.

Rover dealers didn't help, the older dealer who'd been about for a while would try to help but they were mainly going bankrupt so couldn't, the newer dealerships didn't have a hope in hell.

Rover in the end built a couple of brilliant cars that I'd love, I'll buy an MG ZT V8 in the next couple of years, I'd be happy with a 75 V8 for that matter. The problem was that no matter how good a Rover was, people would still want to pay nothing for it - preferably over 5 years.

The end should have come for Rover a long time ago, the 75 was their last chance - they blew it.

Pete M ( snipped-for-privacy@bogoffwithzepressedmeatblueyonder.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

I dunno about that...

I'd have said the P6 was more of a 5-series equivalent, the same sector as the Mk2 Jag had been in.

The BMW 1602/2002 was much more of a 3-series predecessor.

Dunno about *10* years after - the 45-shape 400 was an excellent car when it came out 11 years ago, suffering only from not quite being sure what market sector it was in. It was up against much larger Mondeo/Vectra opposition when I had a couple as Co.Cars.

It was certainly way behind the opposition by the end, though, but that was more because of the huge strides that the opposition had taken in that time, which Rover just couldn't match.

The "bubble" 200/25 was a direct replacement for the origami 200 - the CityRover was the (way overdue and utterly inadequate) Metro/100 replacement.

Why the stupid slider controls? Why a radio cassette player on some of the upper models?

They done the usual British thing, cut corners. Consumers, especially in Britain, where we're a bit paranoid of paying over the odds for usually expensive items, weren't happy with the quality, not just build quality, but quality of many of the components. That's why Rover went downhill. Their cars still rust after a few years internally much worse than other cars, and I concur that it's a terrible shame they didn't get their finger out of their arses and start taking it seriously.

Britain have a pretty crap reputation for building many common consumer items, so this is just another down the pan.

It was also marketed as a "premium" car - they'd abandoned any attempt at keeping mainstream, but unfortunately the cars never appeared to match the promise. (And the 400 didn't have headroom in the back. Ok, neither does my BX, but it's still annoying...)

cheers, clive

and

SWMBO had a 1996 Mini- we bought it in 1998, IIRC. Great car- loved it. It being a mini, I decided to waxoyl it. I was shocked: the seams in all the front panels (and the panels themselves) were protected by nothing more than primer. No underseal, seam sealer, stonechip, nothing. Shocking. I also remember a Car Mechanics project Rover 800 with similarly spectacularly bad protection.

The head gasket fiasco was also made worse by a failure to take it seriously.

And they *kept on* trying the premium thing, even when evryone knew they were a re-engineered out of date Honda outclassed by everything except a Proton.

To slightly-retarded managers, that's seen as a good thing. "Our dealers are raking it in. Excellent."

I'm still shocked when I see K-reg protons with no rust, and healthy sounding engines. Can't be all bad.

They've only done about 20k miles, though, 'cos grandad only ever uses them to pop down the shops on a Friday morning.

Some of the M-reg's on autotrader look in pretty reasonable condition considering they've done ~120k miles since 1995.

Have to say, I've never driven one. I do wonder if some of those on autotrader are really as bad to drive as I've heard...

the M-reg's on autotrader look in pretty reasonable condition

I just found out there's a proton.co.uk

I've never ever seen a 'new' Proton in a car-auction. I presumed they'd stopped selling cars year ~2000. Christ.... what a world.

David R (david snipped-for-privacy@ntlworld.com) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

I have. I had a then-new M-reg Persona for a week as a rental.

It wasn't *that* bad.

It was worse.

Now don't get me wrong, Protons are, for the money, good value, and seem reliable too. For some poeple they are a good choice. But they are based on second-hand technology, and aren't the most inspiring cars. The thing is, Protons are sold as an economy brand, Rover were trying to pass off their outdated models as premium.

I'd say there were pretty fundamental mistakes being made before that. Like when Triumph and Rover were competing head to head, while owned by the same company. Just think of all the fiascos and near misses that caused - the Stag engine being the obvious one. Then there was that wonderful mid-engined sports car, the P6BS, that never made it into production because it would have threatened Jaguar too much.

Oh I agree entirely.

Jaguar - Rover - Triumph was just one of the many mistakes that Rover was dragged through, in my post above I was just making points regarding the Rover "brand" itself. The complete idiocy of BL in the 70's is still astonishing, Austin vs Morris, Rover vs Triumph, Rover vs Jaguar etc.

This wouldn't have been so bad if they'd actually been able to build all these cars to a decent standard, it would have been a great improvement if they could build /any/ of them to a decent standard..

My father owned a large garage in the 70's and used to buy new cars on a regular basis. As they'd often be bought in August I used to go with him to collect them and even as a 7 year old I remember being amazed that brand new cars could have as many faults as they did. Dolomite Sprints that needed rust repairs, SD1s with paint falling off in sheets, Jag XJ12s with mental electrics, Princess 2.0s with knackered suspension and less than 100 miles on the clock, Stags that overheated, Triumph 2500PI's with injection systems that used to piss fuel all over the floor when parked.

At the same time my dad would drive either a P6 3500 or a Ford Granada 3.0 - the Granadas would never give any trouble. The P6's would never bloody start if it was warm out but were otherwise ok.

Great idea huh? Build 2 3 litre-ish V8 engines in the same company, and build one so poorly it blows up.

It's the exact reverse of what goes on now: these days we have loads of different cars sharing loads and loads of common parts.