Forums69
Topics113,624
Posts1,341,348
Members1,807
|
Most Online731 Jan 14th, 2020
|
|
|
Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude Vtec!
#753528
22/01/2009 15:00
22/01/2009 15:00
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,390 Essex
Trappy
OP
Forum is my life
|
OP
Forum is my life
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,390
Essex
|
Another one I have found in my nevereneding quest for car performance data! Enjoy!
F****** b****** thing...
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude Vtec!
[Re: Ed]
#753541
22/01/2009 15:25
22/01/2009 15:25
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,390 Essex
Trappy
OP
Forum is my life
|
OP
Forum is my life
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,390
Essex
|
Sad fact time That's a pre-production Coupé as the B pillar badges are set lower down! I to a superior
F****** b****** thing...
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude Vtec!
[Re: Ed]
#753564
22/01/2009 15:56
22/01/2009 15:56
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
nice review and after having a rover coupe turbi i would agree with most things but not with others. i haven't driven a 16vt coop but the fact is that the rover i had would pretty much keep with my 20vt so i can't see the 16vy holding out to much on keeping up. the handling is good and slightly crashy but the main thin is the rover has no where near the grip of the coop but it is much flater through the coners and feels more stable.
brakes on the rover are the worse i have ever used they are usless. the seats in the rover are much better in holding you in place and are comfy. the coops seats are no good for a performance car at all.
looks i must say my rover turbo was in tahiti blue with 18's and looked great and i my bro had a silver turbo and they look great but i must say i think i now think the coop looks better but its taken me a while to think that.
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude Vtec!
[Re: ]
#753572
22/01/2009 16:03
22/01/2009 16:03
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,390 Essex
Trappy
OP
Forum is my life
|
OP
Forum is my life
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,390
Essex
|
i haven't driven a 16vt coop but the fact is that the rover i had would pretty much keep with my 20vt so i can't see the 16vy holding out to much on keeping up.
The numbers suggest that the 16vT wouldn't be as quick as the Rover. In fact it is almost neck and neck with the Prelude?
F****** b****** thing...
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude Vtec!
[Re: Trappy]
#753593
22/01/2009 16:23
22/01/2009 16:23
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
once you get grip in the rover its a quick car indeed but it is difficult to lay the power down
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude Vtec!
[Re: ]
#753599
22/01/2009 16:35
22/01/2009 16:35
|
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,390 Essex
Trappy
OP
Forum is my life
|
OP
Forum is my life
Joined: Feb 2006
Posts: 5,390
Essex
|
Without doubt they are quick cars. I had a great couple of runs against one when my coop was standard. Nothing in it over a few hundred metres (as the data suggests) but from a highish speed roll (70mph+) they don't hang on for long. i remember holding him whilst letting off and then closing the gap again as he went past in 3rd gear a few times. Not very tuneable either...
Great in their day but a little dated now. Incidentally i was looking for Calibra 4x4 Data data when i stumbled across this. Another 'almost great' car I must find numbers for...
F****** b****** thing...
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude Vtec!
[Re: Trappy]
#753911
22/01/2009 22:36
22/01/2009 22:36
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
my bro who had my coop before me now has a n/a rover coupe and its still nice to drive. he has gone from a 20vt and wants another rover turbo. one point i must say is i find the rover coupe more reliable and much much much cheaper to fix and also very easy to work on. i would be tempted back i must say but they suffer from rust now so finding one without to much rot is getting harder but if you do great car.
i know my mate sold his one just been rebuilt running 320bhp and was mint and sold for 2.5k which is alot of car for your dollar
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude Vtec!
[Re: ]
#753929
22/01/2009 23:11
22/01/2009 23:11
|
Bigtop
Unregistered
|
Bigtop
Unregistered
|
i had a 1.8 vvc coupe before the fiat. only had 147bhp but was pretty nippy good car, was a sort of purpley flip paint, standard colour but looked on 17s
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude Vtec!
[Re: ]
#753995
23/01/2009 00:29
23/01/2009 00:29
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,694 Midlands
MCMike
Club member 2095
|
Club member 2095
Forum is my job
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,694
Midlands
|
I also ran a Tahiti Blue Rover Turbo Coupe (with full Recaro leather) for 3 years. Great car, but not as quick as a 20VT - the brakes were weak and it never really felt planted on the road - despite uprated suspension. It was very reliable though, and was still on the original Turbo & Clutch at 115,000 miles. Jumping into a Coupe after the Rover and the Coupe felt far more solid, refined, and upmarket.
1972 Triumph Stag 1984 Alfasud TI 1999 Fiat Coupe Turbo LE 2005 350Z
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude Vtec!
[Re: MCMike]
#754005
23/01/2009 00:42
23/01/2009 00:42
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
total agree with you mike. my rover was tuned as was as quick as my coop. uprated suspensin is a tough one on the rovers because anything to hard makes it very crashy ride. the coop is mre refined and comfy but the rover had that raw really fun feel about it but not great for aday to day stuff.
brakes are the major problem they are so bad its unbelivable
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#754070
23/01/2009 07:57
23/01/2009 07:57
|
Spee
Unregistered
|
Spee
Unregistered
|
Minging interiors on those Rovers though! That Dash! It really shows what a looker the Coop is when you see one stood next to cars of the same vintage like in that article, looks so much more modern and to be honest, exotic, a different league. Gareth
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#754154
23/01/2009 11:03
23/01/2009 11:03
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
the new type bubble dash was much nice but the seats are so much better than the coops. i have a rover coupe on the drive next to my coop and it looks just as good! the rover never look good in picture. the rover turbo is in the same league as the coop no doubt about it. i prefer the coop for sure but for the money the rover is a better car you get a 300 bhp exellent conditon rover for under 3k and the insurance if half of the coops and so is the parts and labour cost on the car.
there is many things i really like about the coop but equaly many things about the rover turbos i really like
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#754213
23/01/2009 12:19
23/01/2009 12:19
|
eldinho
Unregistered
|
eldinho
Unregistered
|
I used to have a Rover coupe quite a few years back unfortunately. I would say they are nowhere near in the same league as the Fiat Coupe in the way they make you feel. They just don't feel solid at all and have dated far worse!
Your rear passengers would come out of the car with their heads tilted at 90 degrees from their neck becoming stiff to fit in the car!
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#754216
23/01/2009 12:24
23/01/2009 12:24
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
yeah ok rear head room is tight but i don't sit in the back. to drive they are funa nd fast and still look good maybe dated but still look good. the coop looks dated but still good.
its what you like but they are a good car and a worthy rival for a coop
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#754584
23/01/2009 21:12
23/01/2009 21:12
|
porkypaul
Unregistered
|
porkypaul
Unregistered
|
I had a rover coupe a few years ago and I wouldn't have an other after having the coupes. They look really outdated
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#754628
23/01/2009 21:50
23/01/2009 21:50
|
symonh2000
Unregistered
|
symonh2000
Unregistered
|
I had a Rover Vitesse Sport a few years back and it was the most unreliable pile of junk I have ever owned.
I think the engine is good though, it is just everything else that goes with it.
The differential bearings are a prime example, as they appear to be made of cheese.
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#754801
24/01/2009 02:38
24/01/2009 02:38
|
Spee
Unregistered
|
Spee
Unregistered
|
the new type bubble dash was much nice but the seats are so much better than the coops. i have a rover coupe on the drive next to my coop and it looks just as good! the rover never look good in picture. the rover turbo is in the same league as the coop no doubt about it. i prefer the coop for sure but for the money the rover is a better car you get a 300 bhp exellent conditon rover for under 3k and the insurance if half of the coops and so is the parts and labour cost on the car.
there is many things i really like about the coop but equaly many things about the rover turbos i really like It's ok! The pills wear off after a while!
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#756257
26/01/2009 04:00
26/01/2009 04:00
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,960 west bromwich
coupedummy
Je suis un Coupé
|
Je suis un Coupé
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,960
west bromwich
|
ive havent owned the rover coupe turbo but owned an n/a.Loved my 2 litre n/a.was nippy,reliable and targa. Dated yeh but easy driving,lazy engine to bowl along in,then pulls well when floored.
Drove the turbo,bit more harsh,prefered the more lazy boy of the n/a to be honest.Best engine for the tomcat or the vvc really. Terrible handling,much much worse than the coupe.Pushed it far in the dry you could get great oversteer.Massive understeer in the wet.
The coupe on the other hand,different fish.More nimble and responsive.Drives completly different,feels alot shorter and handle much better. Seats are very different and think i prefered the rover for comfort but coupe for styling for full interior.
also huge break fade many times on the rover!Bombing upto and island at 70 with foot thru the floor trying to stop the rover gave a new mean to new pants please.
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: coupedummy]
#761099
01/02/2009 02:00
01/02/2009 02:00
|
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,581 London
MrCooper
I need some sleep
|
I need some sleep
Joined: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,581
London
|
You have to take what you can get if you drive a rover:
Site owner's summary: The Rover Coupe is praised for its engine and build quality, but criticised for its handling and light steering.
Article's conclusion: But in reality it's a looser - a car that amounts to markedly less than the sum of its parts, burdened by nasty steering, dodgy gearchange, dubious handling and dead feeling brakes. In the end the Rover is not much fun to drive.
Obviously a corker of a car...
Ex Grigio Moon 20VT Plus Ex 350Z Now Aston Martin Vantage
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: Tommy_Coop23]
#762568
02/02/2009 19:57
02/02/2009 19:57
|
symonh2000
Unregistered
|
symonh2000
Unregistered
|
I once drove the 1.6 honda engined version of the Rover Coupe.
Even with only 111bhp it torque steered and span its wheels all over the place.
The turbo must have been a real handful.
I still think the T series Turbo is a very good engine though, it is just everything else that goes with it is iffy and under developed.
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#762979
03/02/2009 01:25
03/02/2009 01:25
|
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,694 Midlands
MCMike
Club member 2095
|
Club member 2095
Forum is my job
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 3,694
Midlands
|
Yes apart from the slightly leaky head gaskets, the T Turbo engines are very reliable, mine did 65,000 miles of hard labour with no issues.
1972 Triumph Stag 1984 Alfasud TI 1999 Fiat Coupe Turbo LE 2005 350Z
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: Tommy_Coop23]
#763327
03/02/2009 14:36
03/02/2009 14:36
|
Spee
Unregistered
|
Spee
Unregistered
|
The coupe still looks lovely and fresh in the article, the other two horribly dated How true, but I think everything from that era looks dated compared to the coop! G
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#763358
03/02/2009 14:49
03/02/2009 14:49
|
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,918 Stoke-on-Trent duck!
Tommy_Coop23
My life on the forum
|
My life on the forum
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 1,918
Stoke-on-Trent duck!
|
How can you say a rover coupe looks just as good as a fiat coupe lol, are you taking the mick?
I'll be back Alor Blue Seat Leon FR 180 atm
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: Tommy_Coop23]
#763360
03/02/2009 14:49
03/02/2009 14:49
|
Spee
Unregistered
|
Spee
Unregistered
|
I had a 406 Coupe, nice looking car, of that there is no doubt at all, but have you seen the interior!! Sit one next to the coop, there is no contest. The GTV is a fab looking car too, but what an ugly arse!
|
|
|
Re: Autocar- 16vT vs Rover 220 turbo and Prelude V
[Re: ]
#763439
03/02/2009 15:26
03/02/2009 15:26
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
peanuthead
Unregistered
|
im not taking the mich because i think it does and its more fun to drive and cheaper to run! i find the seats nicer and its much easier to work on mine was miles more reliable than the coop in a big way! if i had the choice of the two side by side and rust wasn't a problem on the rover i would be hard pushed to choose
|
|
|
|