2000 Rover - Austin 25 Reviews - Page 3 of 5

2000 Rover - Austin 25 iS 1.4 (103ps) from UK and Ireland

Model year2000
Year of manufacture2000
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 1.4 (103ps) Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 4 / 10
Dealer Service marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.4 / 10
Distance when acquired32000 miles
Most recent distance66000 miles
Previous carCitroen ZX

Summary:

Feisty and fun

Faults:

The ECU had to be re-programmed as the car when I bought it had been running with a perforated exhaust which "confused" it.

The alternator was replaced at 47000.

The ABS ring had to be replaced at 63000.

The resistor pack for the heater blower motor went at 65000.

General Comments:

You need to stoke the revs to over 4000 rpm to make the car shift, but please do it as it really flies. It also makes a great sound at these revs! below 4000 though the engine especially in the higher gears is a bit flaccid, due to the lack of torque.

Fuel economy is excellent though. I managed on my journey to my holiday destination of 400 miles, travelling on the motorways at 85 - 90 mph and loaded to the gun-whales 42 mpg!

The handling through fast sweepers and through left / right flicks is excellent. Motorway stability is good. However on sharp bends it does understeer on the wide 15" wheels. The ride on the large wheels is stiff, but I like that.

The steering is possibly the best aspect of the car. The feel for a powered system is good, but the turn in is superb.

The interior is OK although I am glad that my wife and I are only 5' 7". I consider the cabin to be snug, but if I was any taller it would be a bit tight. The dash itself is a bit shiny by modern (VW) standards, but everything is laid out well and nothing has fell off or rattled. No air con though is a bit of a pain in the summer.

My wife thinks the seats are very uncomfortable after my previous Citroen ZX. The seats are a bit thin and cheap, but it is not the most uncomfortable car I have been in. Why Rover didn't fit the seats from the previous generation Rover 200 (R8) though I will never know.

The ABS backed brakes are awful and easily the worst aspect of the car. They are spongy, lacking in feel and the ABS cuts in too easily, especially if you hit a pot-hole / man-hole cover when braking.

The paint is prone to scratches and stone-chips, but there has been no rust. The tailgate lock mechanism did seize due to corrosion (causing the tailgate to pop open which is an "interesting" experience when on a motorway.

Overall though an excellent car and one I would recommend, though I would go for the MG version for a bit more excitement.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 7th October, 2005

2000 Rover - Austin 25 iL 2.0 TD from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2000
First year of ownership2004
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 2.0 TD Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 5 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired32000 miles
Most recent distance47000 miles
Previous carRover - Austin Montego

Summary:

Frustrating - generally good, but with the one serious fault

Faults:

Replacements done under warranty:

Power steering pump failure - shrieking within an hour of installation!

Air flow meter - twice.

Clutch - 3 replacements, now shuddering again after 1500 miles.

Door mirrors didn't heat.

General Comments:

The car has been reliable in so much as it hasn't broken down! It is astonishingly quick, with 52 MPG around and about avalable, (not when driven quickly!) Road holding is very good, ride a touch jiggly p'raps.

The clutch judder is a serious problem, only occurring when cold and into warm-up; bad enough to shake the whole car, things on the seat next to me jump up and down. When hot, it is perfectly well behaved.

Air - con works well, cold toes! Disadvantage of on/off system instead of climate control.

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

Review Date: 26th May, 2005

2000 Rover - Austin 25 iL 1.4 (103ps) from UK and Ireland

Model year2000
Year of manufacture2000
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.4 (103ps) Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 2 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.8 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance103300 miles
Previous carPeugeot 406

Summary:

Cheap running and well above average

Faults:

In just over 103,000 miles its had only 1 fault which was with the air con system, it just wouldn't work at all, a visit back to the dealer 3 days after purchase had it fixed within 5 hours, the culprit being a dodgy switch.

The only thing this car has had to have replaced are usual service parts such as pads, wiper blades etc...

General Comments:

Starting off with the body work, after 103,000 miles its pretty good, the odd stone chip on the bonnet, but no visible rust.

Its very comftable to drive around town and on short journeys although the seats do lack any form of decent lumbar support on long distance journeys, anything over 2 hours or so and your back starts to ache.

The interior although dull looking is functional and instruments are set out to be rather handy.

Driving position is above average when you play around with the seat height adjust and steering adjust, I say this as its not a car you can just get in and feel at home.

Rear leg room is very good for a car of this size, easily seating 3 adults in the rear in comfort.

Boot space is also not bad for a car of this size, easily swallowing a few suitcases or a pushchair and a trolley full of shopping in my case.

On the road the car is quite nippy, its the 103ps model and therefore alittle quicker than the usual 1.4 unit. This is mostly noticed in acceleration which takes you from 0-60 in just over 10 seconds.

When driven hard the engine can be quite noisy, but the power is there and its very rare that you feel the car struggles. Road noise is acceptable although this does get more noticeable on motorway driving at anything over 70mph.

Handling is much better than the old Rover 200, its very precise in country lanes with no trouble at all and almost no hint at loss of traction.

As for fuel consumption this car runs on the tears of squirrels!

Around town I get about 36mpg and on a long drive I get about 48mpg!

Why people hate Rover and this model is beyond me, unless I have just been lucky, but for me this car has served me very well and has now been passed on to my wife to replace her Metro.

The only reason I have changed vehicle is due to an ever growing family, I now have a Mondeo TD-Di.

So to sum up... cheap running, cheap insurance, great handling, above average ride and comfort and mainly no major repair issues, in my opinion you can't go far wrong in regards to reliability, although high depreciation costs may be a factor to consider if you don't keep your cars long.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 2nd November, 2004

Average review marks: 7.4 / 10, based on 17 reviews