1997 Rover - Austin 400 Reviews - Page 6 of 7

1997 Rover - Austin 400 i 1.6 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1997
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.6 petrol Manual
Performance marks 0 / 10
Reliability marks 0 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
3.6 / 10
Distance when acquired54000 miles
Most recent distance78000 miles
Previous carHonda Accord

Summary:

Do Not Buy A Rover!!!

Faults:

DO NOT BUY A ROVER 400.

(serviced at 71,000, again at 77,000 then this below happened a week later)

1.Cylinder head gasket blew. Noticed water from radiator was draining into engine and overheating. Got it repaired before it ceased.

2.Electrics went. Lights, dials etc.

3.Brakes failed (worrying)

4. Huge amount of niggely bits break.

General Comments:

Absolute worst car could be bought!!!

Smooth ride and good handling. Was driven fairly hard, but not to the extent that caused all the problems.

Previous car was a 98 Honda accord 1.8l. This car did 38,000 with no service and absolutely nothing went wrong.

Going to try and change this rover for a Honda, but the value of rovers drop so bad its frightening.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 23rd April, 2004

10th Jul 2004, 07:46

You didn't service your honda for 38000 miles isn't this asking for bother!

1997 Rover - Austin 400 SLDi 2.0 turbo diesel from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1997
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 2.0 turbo diesel Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.4 / 10
Distance when acquired62000 miles
Most recent distance105000 miles
Previous carRover - Austin 45

Summary:

Good value and still looks good

Faults:

Air conditioning failed to blow cold, but this was traced to a leak in the entire system after an accident.

Offside front shock absorber failed at 84000 miles.

General Comments:

I am very impressed by the turbo diesel engine in the 400 series. Even after 105,000 miles it pulls strongly across the gears and is very quick. On a long run it usually returns around 45mpg and this at high motorway speeds as well.

Servicing is relatively cheap and parts don't seem to expensive. There are always specialist garages around to look after them if you don't want to go to a main dealer.

One snag is with the cam-belt change: there are several belts which have to be changed each time and although they aren't very expensive, I've been quoted £400 labour alone as it seems to be a fiddly job.

Overall though it is thoroughly reliable and well equipped car for the money.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 9th September, 2002

1997 Rover - Austin 400 416i 1.6 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1997
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 1.6 Manual
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 2 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.4 / 10
Distance when acquired39000 miles
Most recent distance48000 miles
Previous carNissan Primera

Summary:

An car not for the sane!!!

Faults:

Cylinder head gasket blew at 40000.

Door trim fell off in several places leaving the car unable to be opened.

Leaks from all windows.

The engine had to be re-conditioned at 42000 because of several major problems.

Rust around sills, wheel arches and petrol cap.

Problems with power steering.

Brakes failed on many occasions.

General Comments:

Do NOT buy a Rover 400. They are absolute wrecks.

If you want a car that is reliable never buy a Rover. The car handled terrible was very noisy and the engine just had no power. Under 3000 revs you felt a sharp "shudder" every time you depressed the throttle and it would struggle to move.

I owned the 'Heap' for two years and it gave me nothing but trouble, it wouldn't start on many occasions, the brakes were always faulty an absolute WRECK!!!

NEVER EVER BUY A ROVER!!!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 29th July, 2002

30th Jul 2002, 10:17

Thanks for the advice. Was the car really that BAD?

5th Aug 2002, 03:43

The problems started (again) for Rover when they left the alliance with Honda and created the new Rover.

9th Sep 2002, 13:12

I think you are a one off, My Rover 400 has been great for 100,000 miles and I am going buy another. Rust? how can the sills rust when the are aluminium? Before you take his advice, go and test-drive a rover 75, you will fall in love.

1997 Rover - Austin 400 Si 1.6 16v from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1997
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 1.6 16v Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 10 / 10
Dealer Service marks 10 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
9.6 / 10
Distance when acquired21000 miles
Most recent distance65000 miles
Previous carCitroen ZX

Summary:

BMW+MERC eater for escort money

Faults:

Nothing yet. But when it does I'm sure the dealer will fix it quickly and efficiantly

General Comments:

When I was looking for a replacement for my Citroen, I was concentrating on BMWs or an Audi, but the Rover caught my eye and I fell in love. The Rover 400 series is one of the most under-rated cars on the market. To see how good the interior is, simply park it up next to a BMW. Admire the wood trim and cream leather in the Rover, then look at the BMW- bland black plastic with grey cloth seats. The rover K-series engine is the best I've owned. You can easily get 140bhp by just adding some K&N air filters. Plant your foot to the floor and it makes a great noise like a v-8 but subdues to near silent on the motorway where you are cosseted by the interior. If you are looking for a big exec car Don't buy a BMW! Buy a ROVER!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 1st July, 2002

2nd Jul 2002, 10:15

I wish you the Best Of British my friend when it comes to dealing with the Rover Service Department at your local dealership. You are far better off finding a specialist as the dealers are great conmen. One thing to watch out for concerning the K-Series engines. They have very long head bolts. Which over time come undone or indeed break! Obviously this is a major repair. The rear arches also rust out badly on all 400 rovers. Luckily mine got written off. I now drive a Lexus which is obviously nicer image wise.

Average review marks: 7.2 / 10, based on 24 reviews