2004 MG ZR 105 from UK and Ireland - Comments

Absolutely nothing! Its been fantastic.

The only glitch was when some idiot crashed into me as I was leaving a c ar park and dented two doors and ripped open my rear tyre!!

From outside it looks like a sleek, sporty boy racer car, but one which most boy racers can't afford and only wish they had, however this boy racer does! and god, I love it!

The body styling has been much improved on the previous model that's why I got a new 54reg one instead of a 03reg one!

The interior is as hot as the exterior, and compared to my J-reg escort it's a world of a difference! Half leather seats that really wrap around you and keep you firm in your seat, which is what you need in this thing as you can get round the corners without dropping to 2nd and slowing down, its handling is spot on.

My only wish is that it was a bit quicker on the 0-60, its 10second rush is enough to get you excited and enough to burn that 1.8 focus zetec or astra 1.8sxi sitting next to you at the lights as he looks across thinking he's better than you.

GET IT IN BLUE OR BLACK OR XPOWER GREY!!

I can't believe you are talking about "burning cars from the light" with your pathetic mg zr 105. lol.

The car isn't even a warm hatch, your rivals for speed are nissan micras etc... Now "grow up" and get a life.

What do you mean it isn't even a warm hatch? It may not be hot, but its definitely warm. A saxo VTR has five less horses under the bonnet, and from a 1.6 litre engine! The fact that this superb little 1.4 can develop 105 BHP should be respected, especially considering it has better performance than a 2.0 8v golf GTI. I suppose that a golf GTI is a city car with milk float performance then?

A saxo vtr is pathetic and slow, but still has a higher power to weight ratio than the mg zr105, and its faster! So where does that leave the mg? Around the same league as a 1300cc nissan micra. Not even a warm hatch.

So why is it then in my mg zr 105+ I wipe the floor with vtrs handerling and speeds from like 30 to 60 or evan 0-60 sorry matey whos talking the talk what car do you have get a life mate just get a life I've sold off my mg now, but I think there a mint car.

I think most people fail to realise the concepts of how the engines bhp actually affects the cars performance. For starters the 1.4k series engine powering the zr is 103bhp. the 105 is derived from the PS figure that most car makers like to use.

On the other hand the ZR utilises the 103bhp very well. its 205/45/17 tyres give it a hell of a lot of grip and the lightweight construction of the engine means you don't loose much bhp in the process of getting power to the wheels.

Comparing these factors to the saxo VTR and any person with a slight degree of knowledge will realise that on the streets a ZR will most certainly dust a VTR off the mark.

I only just got beat by a zr in my metro 114gta which only has 75bhp. it didn't thrash me at all because of power to weight ratio. what you do is you take 1000 divide it by the weight of your vehicle say 855kg for a metro then times that my your bhp to get the bhp per ton. 1000/855 x 75 = 87.71bhp/ton. now this figure isn't far behind the mg zr (99bhp/ton) and a saxo vtr is actually about 109bhp/ton. that extra 9 bhp is actually 10 bhp better than the zr not taking into acount the torque which a 1.4 will lack over the larger 1.6 engine. the vtr I say is about 0.8-1 second quicker than the zr.

I can say that the MG ZR's are not that fast. I can keep up with them in my 1.6i 16v Renault Scenic from 2001. As the 1.6i 16v Scenic will hit 60 in 10.6 and actually has a better top speed that the MG ZR 105. Off the lights the MG ZR is quicker as it is lighter, but above 60 mph there in nothing in it.

This guy in his MG ZR 105 couldn't overtake me no matter how much he tried. I will get out handled by one, but in a straight line they cannot beat me and I get a very shocked look off the people in them. They do look quite nice cars, but I think if you're going to get one, then go for the 1.8i's, or you are just gonna get beat by MPV's.

A lot of people look at MPV's as easy targets. My Uncle owns a 2001 2.0i 16V Scenic and he has wasted VTR Saxo's and a 1.6i 16v Corsa.

I can't believe some one thinks an MG ZR 1.4 would beat a 1.8i Ecotec Astra! I had the 103ps Rover 25 (the same engine that's in the ZR), and to fair it's nippy for a 1.4, but I've now got an Astra Bertone Coupe 1.8 and it would wipe the floor with a ZR or a VTR. Mine does 0-60 in 8.5 seconds and top speed of 130 as standard. Bye bye VTR and Saxo.

OK, lets try and clear this one up for all the Saxo fans out there.

In a straight out race in a urban environment, a MG ZR 1.4 will quite easily out handle and out accelerate a VTR. Fair play, people are 100% correct when it comes to the Saxo having more torque, however its got 90bhp as standard, compared to the 103bhp - 1.4, 117bhp 1.8 etc...

Now take weight into consideration, once again people are 100% correct that the Saxo weighs less than the ZR, however the ZR's additional weight combined with its very stiff suspension make it handle like a dream. If you were to launch a VTR and a ZR into the same corner at 50MPH plus you would see the ZR crap all over the VTR in terms of how well it grips the road.

To rest the argument, put a 1.8 ZR up against a 1.6 VTR, suffice to say the VTR will be eating the ZR's dust...

Of course a 1.8 ZR will out pace the VTR, but not the 1.4 ZR, very good 1.4 engine, but that's not going to compensate for the weight with that small a difference in power. and extra weight will not help it handle, it will hinder it. Unless you've had first hand experience in this I think your wrong. some people say a Honda Integra Type R (only FWD) will handle as well as an evo or scooby, part of that is because it weighs less.

The ZR does not handle better than the Saxo I can tell you that right now having driven them both own neither, but the saxo especially if it's a VTS will leave the ZR trailing when it comes to windy country roads. The saxo can carry more speed through bends and its also the same car as a pug 106 regarded as one of the greatest handling cars ever produced. The ZR isn't.

Either way though its not in the same market segment the ZR is a class above. So its rivals are the megane 225, Focus ST, Civic Type R. Golf GTI, Etc the ZR cannot compete against its rivals. It's a warm hat not a hot hatch.

Can someone please help me! I've just sold my 90hp saxo vtr, wich I had lots of problems with (fuel pump, gearbox, immobiliser and wheel bearings) and I'me looking for a new car, I've test driven a '51 fiesta zetec-s (100hp) and it felt slower than the vtr. I am now thinking of buying a mg zr 1.4, but I'm really cofused. HELP!

Yeah right, a 1.4 MG Rover can beat a 1.8 16v Astra. I have driven both - the Astra handles better (sri), the engine is smooth and puts you in the back of the seat till the red line, though it is not as good at 110mph, but still goes past that quite a bit. Also good on fuel for 1.8.

Why don't you guys try racing a VTS for a change.

Then you'll see a Saxo really perform...

Mg ZR 1.8 160 vvc will outhandle and outperform all the cars in its class. Believe me, I've done it, they are rockets. 0-60 in 7.00 seconds, 140mph, they make a Golf GTi look plain and boring.

Golfs don't look sporty unless it's the r32 model, which isn't that nice looking of cars for the price.

I've got 18 inch spoked alloys, similar to the r32. The r32 is only a second faster and has a 3.2 V6 engine. Buy an MG - they are fun, fast and sporty, and not expensive. Really, I love mine.