1979 Rover - Austin Princess 2 HLS 2.0 petrol
Competent, but poorly built
Admittedly the car I owned was a one owner from new car, but nothing ever went wrong with it. I was given it for free due to its shabby appearance and advanced corrosion. this didn't stop it obtaining a new mot though.
I like these cars, but I'm not blind to the fact that they are hideously ugly from every angle. If leyland had built these in the style of the triplex 10/20 prototype I reckon it would have sold by the shipload.
For all that, they were an extremely civilised car to drive. 1700s were underpowered, 2200 six cylinders too thirsty to justify such a small difference in performance. I found the 2000 the best compromise. at the time I had mine they were a worthless old banger so parts were cheap and readily available from scrapyards.
Ultra comfortable, with armrests in the front seats, a perfect motorway cruiser and 30 mpg easily.
Handling was good for such a large car and in common with other BL front wheel drive cars of the era, they were great in the snow.
I think the huge amount of damage done by early cars unreliability finished this car off by 1979, it never sold in significant numbers afterwards.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know
Review Date: 22nd December, 2006
16th Jan 2007, 15:05
My dad had one of these when we were kids. I remember that lovely hydragas ride and limo-like rear seat space. It was much more capacious than the Granada that replaced it.
Shock horror - I also seem to recall the Princess was pretty reliable. The hydragas had to be pumped up every so often, and it used to run a bit hot in traffic, but other than that it got us about OK.