1991 Rover - Austin 200 Reviews - Page 2 of 6

1991 Rover - Austin 200 GSi 1.4 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.4 petrol Manual
Performance marks 6 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 2 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.6 / 10
Distance when acquired180000 miles
Most recent distance190000 miles
Previous carVauxhall Carlton

Summary:

A cheap runaround

Faults:

Nearside drive-shaft snapped after 1 week of ownership.

General Comments:

This car is fairly well equipped with electric front windows, electric sunroof and mirrors. The phliips radio cassette was binned after it chewed a tape, pioneer head unit installed things are much better :)

The handling is soft (its not meant to be a sports car)

The body is not bad for the year, seems rover and Honda had words with the metal treatment people.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 4th July, 2003

1991 Rover - Austin 200 GTi DOHC 1.6 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.6 Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired105000 miles
Most recent distance113000 miles
Previous carRover - Austin 200

Summary:

Fast, Quick, and Bye Bye

Faults:

The Drivers side Drive Shaft at 50000.

The Drivers side Drive shaft at 110,000.

Calipers to rear - Repeatedly.

General Comments:

The car is extremely quick for a 1600, and even now being 11 years old, it can leave many a car in it's wake.

This is my second Rover 216 GTI (I blew the engine in the first), and my only gripes are the fact that the rear calipers and drivers side Drive Shaft have gone on both, a bit of a Manufacturer boo boo, me thinks!

Next I want the Rover 220 GTI Turbo, everyone wish me luck in finding one!!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 1st February, 2003

17th Jan 2004, 06:44

Good luck mate.

I agree with you, I've also got a rover 216gti and it's superb.

11 years and still running.

17th Apr 2004, 07:48

Hope you found a nice 220 turbo!! I totally agree. The 216 GTI Twin Cam is a cracking motor. I want a 3 door twin cam GTI from around H-K reg, but they are a little rare these days. If buying the 220 beware of dodgy head gaskets, as they go a lot, and the Honda engined 216's are way better (in my opinion!!)

TC.

1st Apr 2005, 09:19

I have owned an 800 vitesse sport with the same engine as the 220 turbo, it was the worst most unreliable car I have owned. Stick to honda engined rovers mate!

1991 Rover - Austin 200 216 GSi 1.6 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1991
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 1.6 petrol Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.5 / 10
Distance when acquired30000 miles
Most recent distance50000 miles
Previous carVolkswagen Polo

Summary:

Cheap to buy, not cheap to run

Faults:

Usual rear suspension problems

Rust along bottom edge of all 4 doors.

General Comments:

This car has a fantastic, free revving engine - it positively encourages you to take it to the red line. The power comes in with a real surge above 3000rpm, and keeps on coming all the way to 7000 (if your ears can take it).

The handling can't quite match the performance, as it rolls considerably, and understeers dramatically, especially in the wet. The driving position doesn't help this, as the height of the seat makes you feel like you are sitting on the car rather than in it.

The downside to the performance is that fuel economy is not very impressive, even given the size, aerodynamics and weight of the car. If it wasn't for this failing, the car would be an excellent motorway cruiser - very comfortable and relaxed. Unfortunately, while the car could cruise happily at 95 mph all day long, you'll be forced to stop every 250 miles or so to refill the tank.

The GSi model is well equipped for its age - electric windows/mirrors/sunroof, central locking, and height adjustable seats with variable lumbar support are all standard.

The quality of the interior is reasonable, with big comfy seats, loads of room, and a huge boot.

Despite the fact that was a very low mileage example, it seemed to eat brake pads and discs. It also got through two exhaust back boxes and one mid-section, although this was probably caused by the low mileage (condensation forming in the pipes and never having a chance to dry out).

Unlike some other reviewers, I found insurance to be expensive - the lowest group any insurer would class it as was group 11 - which meant that insurance cost 50% of the value of the car. Ouch.

Overall - better than I expected: very cheap to buy, but not cheap enough to run to allow me to recommend it whole-heartedly.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 21st October, 2002

Average review marks: 7.1 / 10, based on 32 reviews