Rover - Austin Princess 2 Reviews from UK and Ireland

1979 Rover - Austin Princess 2 HLS 2.0 petrol

Model year1979
Year of manufacture1979
First year of ownership1992
Most recent year of ownership1994
Engine and transmission 2.0 petrol Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.5 / 10
Distance when acquired77000 miles
Most recent distance83000 miles

Summary:

Competent, but poorly built

Faults:

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.

General Comments:

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.

1980 Rover - Austin Princess 2 HLS Automatic 2.2

Year of manufacture1980
Engine and transmission 2.2
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.2 / 10

Faults:

Absolutely nothing, except a snapped choke cable in 1985. -- And I have owned the car since new. It is immaculate, and has never let me down once.

General Comments:

A truly amazing luxury vehicle!!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 28th March, 1999

15th Sep 2001, 09:30

This man is so right! This car is a gem and was Grossly underrated! astonben@hotmail.com.

4th Apr 2006, 16:53

I've had my Princess for a long time and it's been extremely reliable. In the meantime I owned a Toyota MR2 which suffered continuous faults and breakages despite rigorous servicing.

If the Toyota was designed to Leyland standards I would still own it.

Average review marks: 8.4 / 10, based on 2 reviews