Rover 75s likely to depreciate sharply?

Because you could Roush the thing up and run it on bioethanol.

SteveH wrote: If you have been here a while you'll understand that SteveH is not very well endowed which is why if anyone mentions a car - even the Fiesta - the only decent one is the 2 litre etc. (Its a bit like the short man syndrome) The 75 WAS basically a 5 series which is why the RWD ZT could be produced by Rover R&D for approximately 28p. Next you'll be telling us the diesel engine was not BMWs either Keep away from the last year of production and you'll get a car that is already very cheap - make depn. work for you

New Wifes Tale the Punto looks just like a maserati - tee-hee

And you'd be wrong.

The only decent Fiestas, ever, have been the MkI 130 Super Sport and MkI XR2.

You'd be wrong again.

The 'transmission tunnel' wasn't there because the car was originally designed to be RWD, it was there to keep the floorpan rigid. This is why Rover had to spend rather a lot of money with ProDrive on the RWD conversion.

There's next to nothing shared between an E34 and the Rover 75. There may be shared design ideas, but the 75 was a very separate and distinct platform.

It was a significantly modified version of the engine.

The only problem with this is that they still have a very long way to fall.

I was kind of tempted by a seriously cheap 75 TD last year - only because I could have picked it up for £2k. However, I knew it would have been more or less worthless when I came to sell it.

AWD option, actually.

It is the E39 chassis it's based on, not E34.

If you buy a 2k car of this sort of age which does you well for a few years then being worthless at sale time is neither here nor there as it is such a tiny part of the overall running costs.

One lardy BMW is the same as any other to me.

Still not very closely related to any BMW, though.

An E39 lardy? I'd suggest you try one. And then name a similar sized/type car that handles better.

All cars of that size are lardy. Which is why I've kept my (Alfa) 75.

That would be the car with a turning circle similar to a super tanker?

Utter utter utter bollucks. As SteveH says.

No, it's more that SteveH tried a BMW once, some time ago, and therefore assumes all are similar.

You have poo dribble on your chin.

Go try one, or shut up trying to spout off about something you know nothing about, eh?

You know something, you're just about to go in the bozo bin for being the most irritating faux-yank f****it I've ever encountered.

Big, heavy car = lardy and not at all interesting to me.

No matter what you do to a car, you can't hide the fact that it's about

And, before you start your anti-VW tripe, that includes my Passat, and the one before it.

Yes, they're nice to drive and can hussle along a bit - but they're still *way* too big and heavy. Which is why I've kept my 75.

How much heavier and longer is a passat than a golf? Coz you did have that option IIRC and you turned it down instantly. Which suggests to me that that those factors aren't as important to you as you're making out here.

cheers, clive

Clive George ( snipped-for-privacy@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :

That was a business decision based on wanting to have some room left over in the boot when I have all my work-related stuff in it.

A Jetta would have been fine, but they weren't available from Leaseplan at the time. But a Golf boot is far too small.

I still don't approve of the size of the car - it's a complete arse to park in a lot of car-parks.

What puzzles me is that my 75 has just as much cabin space as a Passat, but is a fair bit smaller than a Jetta. The downside of my 75 is that the boot is a bit on the small side - but that's the price you pay for having a transaxle under the boot floor.

Not a great example, given that the Golf is also over-sized and lardy for what it is.

That's modern cars for you, I suppose.

Thick doors? Mades the difference width-ways anyway.

(I go for the non-lardy thing too - but like having boot space, hence one of the reasons for my choice of car)

cheers, clive

Please do, that way you'll stop annoying me by posting stuff you know nothing about.

That's a very narrow minded opinion, something we've come to expect from you, though.

That doesn't make any sense.

Oh you mean the one that was quicker than a hot hatch and handled better too? Uh-huh.

Hahahahahahaah!

Point is that they're *not* able to "hussle along a bit" compared to its mainstream competition. You'd appreciate this if you tried other stuff rather than the mini-reviews, aimed to try to persuade people that you don't have blinkers.

Is this enough to put me in your killfile? Unless Macs don't allow this.

See ya.

Clive George ( snipped-for-privacy@xxxx-x.fsnet.co.uk) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying :