Rover 600s

That wouldn't be the Formula 1 car in an Espace body for PR purposes would it?

The TS 156 is nicer to drive although it doesn't have the power of the TI - power is not everything.

-- James

A 155 Cloverleaf would probably compete well with the TI, cheaper and same generation of technology too.

-- James

Wasn't somebody arguing that a Ti was a lot smaller than a 164? If there is as much as a foot in length in it, I'd be suprised.

-- James

The GTAs seem to be

-- James

It's expensive because when you change the cambelt you have to change the balance shaft bearings and balance shaft belt too.

On the cheap you can just remove the balance shaft belt which means the engine doesn't have to come out.

-- James

Apart from depreciation, fuel bills, insurance, tax, servicing costs etc

-- James

Surely that's what those lights on the dash are for, isn't it? And the Laguna II has tyre pressure monitors.

Actually, if you want to get pedantic on checking fluids and the like, when was the last time you checked your gearbox oil level?

-- James

Modern turbo engines have some sort of method of keeping the turbo cool, i.e. water cooling / oil cooler / oil water heat exchanger which makes them last longer.

-- James

Oooh yeah - the T4.

They've got it much better now though - try an S60 T5 and you'll see what I mean.

Not low powered, just able to handle the power it has, i.e. power and handling must be matched.

It's cheap for a few reasons one of which may have been that the public at large expected Rover to go bankrupt another could be that they didn't have the same development budget that other companies did and the 600 should have been replaced earlier.

If I was ignoring cost, I wouldn't go for a Ti, but when cost comes into the equation the Ti does represent value for money in some respects (bang for buck), you can get quite a new Ti for not a lot of wedge.

Personally, on the mileage I do, the Ti isn't good value for money but I do more derv miles than the DervMan himself.

-- James

Yes! Except, sadly, Alfa Romeo lights don't seem to light up when it's low on oil. :(

:)

Sure; you want the power to exploit the handling, but if you simply have great handling and little power, this is preferable to lots of power and no handling.*

meaningless

At the moment that's not very difficult. Kermit's covered almost 450 miles since the end of October. :(

Ti's have an oil cooler mounted near the intercooler.

Surely a Garrett T25 will last as long in a Ti as it would on any other car?

It's a lot closer than I originally thought. I parked the Rover next to one today, the 164 doesn't seem as big as I remember it to be :)

The V6 164 still weighs the best part of 1500 kilos tho, has less power and worse acceleration.

I mention 2,750 as the point where it generally really starts to go for it, peak torque is actually much lower than that.

lol. Which century are you living in ? This isn't an RS Turbo we're talking about you know :)

But it generally isn't the same. A blown 2.0 car will almost always have more power and less weight than a larger capacity car. Take the suggested Alfa 164 for instance, it weighs almost 1500 kilos (despite being a much older design), some 150 more than the blown Rover.

But better handling, a more evocative engine sound, proper rust-proofing, lovely styling etc.

Not to mention the fact that you could have a 230bhp, V6 screamer on an R-plate for similar money to the 600.

I'm finding it difficult to decide, which would be the least reliable and need the most garage time and breakdown assistance?