Omega Owners Forum
Chat Area => General Discussion Area => Topic started by: Elite Pete on 27 June 2007, 14:52:45
-
My brother-in-laws MG ZT has just failed its MOT on front and rear discs and pads and has aked me if I could fit some for him. Now having two Rovers myself I know the bloke at the Rover parts place quite well (yes we still have one here) and he always gives me discount. So I went in and asked for a set of new front and rear discs and pads and he recommended new sensors. Now I was thinking somewhere in the £250 region but when he asked for £440 with a 10% discount I burst out laughing and told him to put them back. Can I ask do these cars do 200mph or is it because they weigh 40 tonnes that the discs and pads are so expensive :o
-
Oi! You! Leave my ZT alone!
Look here if you need advice. Theres a cracking fella on there called STMO123 :y
http://forums.mg-rover.org/index.php
-
Oi! You! Leave my ZT alone!
Look here if you need advice. Theres a cracking fella on there called STMO123 :y
http://forums.mg-rover.org/index.php
Theres another one on the diesel side called Elite Pete as well 8-) ;D
-
Oi! You! Leave my ZT alone!
Look here if you need advice. Theres a cracking fella on there called STMO123 :y
http://forums.mg-rover.org/index.php
Be carefull - you might get a post reduction for liking Zts more than Omegas ;D ;D
-
Oi! You! Leave my ZT alone!
I make sure to leave all Rovers very well alone! ;)
-
my brother couldnt wait to get rid of his rover! ;D
-
My wifes ZT is reliable, good looking and , unlike my omega, fast :D
-
My wifes ZT is reliable, good looking and , unlike my omega, fast :D
I can only agree with one of those points, good looking
-
My wifes ZT is reliable, good looking and , unlike my omega, fast :D
I can only agree with one of those points, good looking
Yes, but as far as I know, no one else on here has both, so can't really compare them day-to-day.
-
My wifes ZT is reliable, good looking and , unlike my omega, fast :D
I can only agree with one of those points, good looking
Yes, but as far as I know, no one else on here has both, so can't really compare them day-to-day.
The brother-in-law has had the AA out to his quite a few times, if I remember correctly I think the fuel pump has been replaced and there is a fuse on the crank shaft sensor which keeps blowing so he carries a load of spares. I must admit to liking the shape of the ZT though :y
-
You're gonna get bad'uns in any car range Pete, You should know that ;D ;D :-[
-
You're gonna get bad'uns in any car range Pete, You should know that ;D ;D :-[
I'll say :'(
I think the ZT plays up through not being used very much TBH.
-
You're gonna get bad'uns in any car range Pete, You should know that ;D ;D :-[
I'll say :'(
I think the ZT plays up through not being used very much TBH.
Sorry, mate.
-
Oi! You! Leave my ZT alone!
Look here if you need advice. Theres a cracking fella on there called STMO123 :y
http://forums.mg-rover.org/index.php
Be carefull - you might get a post reduction for liking Zts more than Omegas ;D ;D
Not likely ;)
-
Oi! You! Leave my ZT alone!
I make sure to leave all Rovers very well alone! ;)
You're not immune from a post count reduction either, Mr Laidback....
-
Oi! You! Leave my ZT alone!
Look here if you need advice. Theres a cracking fella on there called STMO123 :y
http://forums.mg-rover.org/index.php
Be carefull - you might get a post reduction for liking Zts more than Omegas ;D ;D
I never said that! Taking everything into account, I wouldn't swap my omega for anything other than a newer one. That includes Vx muscle cars.
-
My wifes ZT is reliable, good looking and , unlike my omega, fast :D
I'd like to see one try it on my 2.6
-
My wifes ZT is reliable, good looking and , unlike my omega, fast :D
I'd like to see one try it on my 2.6
I reckon the Rover may have the legs in dry conditions due to better power to weight...
-
My wifes ZT is reliable, good looking and , unlike my omega, fast :D
I'd like to see one try it on my 2.6
You're being silly Martin. It's would wipe the floor with your 2.6. As I said earlier, I drive both regularly and I know the Zt is much faster. Thats what it was built for, certainly not comfort :)
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
-
Thats because the ZT has low gearing....wrong wheel drive though....and it shows plus its a very peeky engine.
Bloody overly firm ride to for everyday use on a car that size.
I always feel like I'm driving a pub when ever I get behind the wheel of a 75 derivative.....I mean, the speedo looks almost edwardian.
-
I always feel like I'm driving a pub when ever I get behind the wheel of a 75 derivative.....I mean, the speedo looks almost edwardian.
Alas, BMW tried to go all retro with it, and pretty much killed it... ....shame, as a FWD large family car, its not that bad handling wise - overly stiff though for a large motor...
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
>:(Grow up!!! >:(We love our Migs cos they're Migs. There's plenty of blandmobiles that are faster but they've got no character so which would you rather drive? :-?
-
My wifes ZT is reliable, good looking and , unlike my omega, fast :D
I'd like to see one try it on my 2.6
I reckon the Rover may have the legs in dry conditions due to better power to weight...
Being RWD I'd beat it off the line
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
>:(Grow up!!! >:(We love our Migs cos they're Migs. There's plenty of blandmobiles that are faster but they've got no character so which would you rather drive? :-?
If you'de bothered to read the thread instead of diving in at the end I think you'd realise I said that :P
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
I can get a repeatable 7.8 0-60, mine is an ex hire car and is a bit loose.
I reckon I could beat that if I changed manually move at 6000 change at a bit higher than sport mode
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
I can get a repeatable 7.8 0-60, mine is an ex hire car and is a bit loose.
I reckon I could beat that if I changed manually move at 6000 change at a bit higher than sport mode
Ho hum. Bangs head against brick wall ::)
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
I can get a repeatable 7.8 0-60, mine is an ex hire car and is a bit loose.
I reckon I could beat that if I changed manually move at 6000 change at a bit higher than sport mode
Ho hum. Bangs head against brick wall ::)
Interesting that maximum speed is higher on the Omega as well ;D
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
I can get a repeatable 7.8 0-60, mine is an ex hire car and is a bit loose.
I reckon I could beat that if I changed manually move at 6000 change at a bit higher than sport mode
Ho hum. Bangs head against brick wall ::)
Interesting that maximum speed is higher on the Omega as well ;D
Purely academic on our roads :'(
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
I can get a repeatable 7.8 0-60, mine is an ex hire car and is a bit loose.
I reckon I could beat that if I changed manually move at 6000 change at a bit higher than sport mode
And you think the ZT's time couldn't be improved upon?
As said, in the dry, the ZT would leave your 2.6 up to most speeds. Whether or not it is a nicer car or ride is a subjective matter (personally, I prefer Omega).
-
Agreed -- it's pretty well known that most manufacturer's performance figures are conservative, so if the ZT is quoted at 7.6 then a flat 7 seconds is very possible. Especially if it's in manual form, which I assume it is being the ZT rather than the "old man" 75. To be honest I don't think there'd be much in it between a ZT 190 and mine in dry acceleration, and mine has 30 BHP more than a 2.6 plus a manual gearbox.
Saying that, IMO the only ZT worth even looking at is the V8. It's not particularly powerful (260 BHP) considering the engine size, but more importantly it's rear-wheel drive and has a 6-speed manual gearbox. Never driven one but apparently it's great fun, and is probably one of the cheapest ways of getting behind the wheel of a RWD V8 -- depreciation is absolutely horrendous since the demise of Rover. Great fun until it breaks down that is ;).
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
I can get a repeatable 7.8 0-60, mine is an ex hire car and is a bit loose.
I reckon I could beat that if I changed manually move at 6000 change at a bit higher than sport mode
And you think the ZT's time couldn't be improved upon?
As said, in the dry, the ZT would leave your 2.6 up to most speeds. Whether or not it is a nicer car or ride is a subjective matter (personally, I prefer Omega).
Weight transfer is a funny thing, watch hot hatch drivers trying hard!
-
Agreed -- it's pretty well known that most manufacturer's performance figures are conservative, so if the ZT is quoted at 7.6 then a flat 7 seconds is very possible. Especially if it's in manual form, which I assume it is being the ZT rather than the "old man" 75. To be honest I don't think there'd be much in it between a ZT 190 and mine in dry acceleration, and mine has 30 BHP more than a 2.6 plus a manual gearbox.
Saying that, IMO the only ZT worth even looking at is the V8. It's not particularly powerful (260 BHP) considering the engine size, but more importantly it's rear-wheel drive and has a 6-speed manual gearbox. Never driven one but apparently it's great fun, and is probably one of the cheapest ways of getting behind the wheel of a RWD V8 -- depreciation is absolutely horrendous since the demise of Rover. Great fun until it breaks down that is ;).
I fully agree about the V8, as to RWD traction, it is amazing what you can take off the line with better traction, lets say my Sunbeam never lost a TLGP to a front drive car (come to think of it, I don't think it lost any!) My dad driving my mums then Reliant 3 wheeler (she was on bike licence) beat an XR3i at lights.
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
I can get a repeatable 7.8 0-60, mine is an ex hire car and is a bit loose.
I reckon I could beat that if I changed manually move at 6000 change at a bit higher than sport mode
And you think the ZT's time couldn't be improved upon?
As said, in the dry, the ZT would leave your 2.6 up to most speeds. Whether or not it is a nicer car or ride is a subjective matter (personally, I prefer Omega).
Weight transfer is a funny thing, watch hot hatch drivers trying hard!
You are forgetting that Chav'd up hot hatches are engine with no power or torque, so although they may beat you to 20mph, they are hopeless after that. The Rover is a similar engine to Omega, slightly more powerful, similar torque, lighter car, and reasonable front traction in the dry....
-
FWD hot hatches - no I mean they are not quick off the line - weight transfer stuffs them at first.
-
FWD hot hatches - no I mean they are not quick off the line - weight transfer stuffs them at first.
Proper ones are... ...try jumping in an (older) Civic Type R, rev it to about 3.5k (just below the power band) and drop the clutch, and tell me that ain't quick for a 2.0l....
-
That reminds me. I must try my AP22 in my brother's (older) Civic Type R [smiley=evil.gif]
It is a very quick car. It may have relatively little torque at low revs but when it's got a red line at 8k and a 6 speed box the power still feels like it's in a very wide band! (once you get used to the sound of it revving its' gonads off) I'd never stay with it in the Omega. To be honest my Westfield would have its' work cut out staying with it too!
At the end of the day there are a lot of cars that are much lighter than the Omega, and lightness is king off the lights. That and not being geared for 160MPH at the top end.
As long as you have enough traction for the weight you are trying to pull and you don't make the normal boy racer mistake of lighting up the fronts and standing still...
Kevin
-
As long as you have enough traction for the weight you are trying to pull and you don't make the normal boy racer mistake of lighting up the fronts and standing still...
Kevin
Seen this a lot, great fun when you are running a tuned RWD hatch
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
>:(Grow up!!! >:(We love our Migs cos they're Migs. There's plenty of blandmobiles that are faster but they've got no character so which would you rather drive? :-?
If you'de bothered to read the thread instead of diving in at the end I think you'd realise I said that :P
:-[Apologies STMO, was meant for all in a play nicely children humorous context, but when i read it back it did seem a little gobby.
Please ignore. [smiley=cry.gif]
-
ZT 2.5 + (190ps) 4d 2497 / 6 187 140 7.5 28 15
Omega 2.6 V6 24V CDX 4d 2597 / 6 176 142 8.2 26 16
>:(Grow up!!! >:(We love our Migs cos they're Migs. There's plenty of blandmobiles that are faster but they've got no character so which would you rather drive? :-?
If you'de bothered to read the thread instead of diving in at the end I think you'd realise I said that :P
:-[Apologies STMO, was meant for all in a play nicely children humorous context, but when i read it back it did seem a little gobby.
Please ignore. [smiley=cry.gif]
:y
-
why does everybody seem to be talking about rovers,i thought this was a vauxhall omega forum :-/
-
why does everybody seem to be talking about rovers,i thought this was a vauxhall omega forum :-/
did you read the title of this particular thread? ;D
-
did read it but further down the general chat page ,talking about rover bits,and the other night showing rover pictures on the forum,i wish rovers would just die and go away,aarrrgghhh i hate bloody rovers,had my rant , alright now ;D
-
did read it but further down the general chat page ,talking about rover bits,and the other night showing rover pictures on the forum,i wish rovers would just die and go away,aarrrgghhh i hate bloody rovers,had my rant , alright now ;D
Rovers ain't that bad - decent cars when partnered with Honda. Obviously, BMW mismanaged it, and killed it off.