13th Oct 2008, 20:12

I don't think so; that Vauxhall Astra GTE 2.0 16v engine was not very good.

Main problem is camshaft wear, which can be terminal for the engine. Listen for thrashing noises and look for signs of oil weeping from top of engine.

Fuel evaporation problem with all late injected models.

Regular 3,000-mile oil changes essential. If not, engines will sludge up and rattle.

Cambelt tensioners every 70,000 miles.

Hard, jiggly ride not matched by good handling and road feel.

ABS pumps very expensive to replace.

The Vauxhall Astra GTE likes burning oil.

22nd Oct 2008, 16:43

The dowels keep the head-gasket in place.

It's nothing to do with what thermostat is fitted, it's to do with where the thermostat is located.

There were no casting problems, just gasket failure due to poor quality gaskets/dowels and thermal shock from the poor cooling system design.

The Honda engine is very reliable, just like my Volkswagen engine. They are both far less advanced than the Rover though.

22nd Oct 2008, 16:48

The Astra's C20XE engine with it's Cosworth built head was far, far superior to any Japanese copy of the day.

28th Oct 2008, 13:31

I have a lot of time for Honda engines and generally they are of a higher standard than Vauxhall and Rover, but don't pluck a few examples and then say that every Honda engine is better than every Vauxhall/Rover engine.

I own one of the Rover L series diesel engined cars, and whilst it is fairly unrefined and noisy at tickover (as pretty much all diesels of that generation were/are) it is fast, ultra reliable, very economical and has wide scope for tuning potential, and all this in my eyes make it a good engine. Just the same as I could probably pick out a Honda engine that isn't particularly good.

29th Oct 2008, 14:07

28th Oct 2008, 13:31.

I work in the motor trade so I know what am talking about, and was talking about Rover and Vauxhall and Honda in the 90's.

I did not say any thing about the Astra VXR or Rover 45 or Honda Jazz did I?

29th Oct 2008, 17:32

The Rover L-Series diesel is from ~ 1995. Of course you knew that coming from 'the industry'. The L-series was also used in the Honda Civic and Accord, because of Honda and Rovers partnership of the time!!! This kind of blows the 'all Honda engines are better than Rover engines' argument out of the water.

Yes, on the whole Honda engines are more reliable than Rover ones. Even though the Rovers which came with Honda engines were considered no better than Rovers with Rover engines.

As a performance engine though, the K-series offers more than any Honda of the time. If you wanted an engine for a track car the K-series was the better choice. Which is why there are 1000's of Rover powered kit cars. Honda engines were over-engineered, which made them reliable but far too heavy.

30th Oct 2008, 18:46

29th Oct 2008, 17:32 comment.

OK, What do you think to the NSX 3.0 V6 VTEC, which was a fast car and quite reliable, and that car was not that too heavy?

And that engine was manufactured in 1996 or around there.

And people think it's a heavy engine, well I don't think it is, but anyway all you have to do is make the body lighter.

But I do agree on one thing, every car manufacturer shares car parts.

But if someone came up to me with a Rover or a Honda, and said which one do you want, I would have the Honda.

12th Nov 2008, 12:06

"OK, What do you think to the NSX 3.0 V6 VTEC, which was a fast car and quite reliable, and that car was not that too heavy?"

A good engine, but again very heavy. The NSX was a very good car.

"And people think it's a heavy engine, well I don't think it is, but anyway all you have to do is make the body lighter."

Would it not be better to make the body and the engine lighter?

"But if someone came up to me with a Rover or a Honda, and said which one do you want, I would have the Honda."

Yes so would I, for everyday driving I would prefer the more reliable car. But if I needed an engine for a track car, I'd go with the light-weight high-tech K-series.

12th Nov 2008, 16:24

Cool and interesting thread, but do you have some evidence for Honda copying the Rover k-engine?

16th Nov 2008, 12:24

Was high-tech K-series the lightest engine in the world then?

And would a jet engine be more powerful? I know that engine is very heavy, but I think it's faster than the K series engine.

Like you were saying, for a track.

16th Nov 2008, 12:46

What about Honda Racing F1 car then, that's a good track car. I can't remember seeing Rover though.

17th Nov 2008, 12:24

Jet engine for track???

Yes look you tube.

Jet Engine Powered Car.

"What about Honda Racing F1 car then, that's a good track car. I can't remember seeing Rover though."

Lol... yeah, Honda did really well this year yep batter then Rover.

17th Nov 2008, 15:09

Yes track, you did not say what kind of track did you.

And if you look on you tube, you will see loads of jet cars racing, on straight tracks.

And for F1 cars, Honda did better than Rover.

18th Nov 2008, 12:16

"Lol... yeah, Honda did really well this year yep batter then Rover."

An old Rover 214 would have beaten Honda this year.

19th Nov 2008, 14:10

"Lol... yeah, An old Rover 214 would have blown a head gasket

Going round a track and head.

Lol... yeah, can't see your Rover 214 doing 200 mph.

Lol... Rover 214 can't keep up with a Honda DX, what about an f1.

19th Nov 2008, 16:14

Rover 214 very funny, you just wish you bought a Honda or you would not be looking at Honda comments:

Honda F1 car vs Rover Rust box; my money is on the F1 car LOL.

8th Dec 2008, 10:57

LOL at Honda F1...