1992 Rover - Austin Montego Reviews - Page 2 of 2

1992 Rover - Austin Montego DLX Saloon 2.0 turbo diesel from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1996
Most recent year of ownership2000
Engine and transmission 2.0 turbo diesel Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.5 / 10
Distance when acquired45000 miles
Most recent distance159000 miles
Previous carLand Rover Series IIA

Summary:

Very economical cruiser

Faults:

Engine rebuild required at 133,000 miles due to piston collapse in very worn bores. 2 cracked heads. Various service items like tyres, exhaust after 100,000 miles, suspension components, brakes. Car rusting away and looking tatty now.

General Comments:

This car was a bargain to buy and run. I have covered 114,000 miles at a total cost of 13,000 UKP. That includes all fuel, service, engine work, purchase cost and insurance. I will have a problem replacing this car when it rusts away. If I could buy a brand new one with a galvanised and properly painted body I would not hesitate. The car averages 45mpg when thrashed which is how I drive it. 55-60mpg is easily achievable if you can keep off the accelerator, which takes some beating even with a new car, particularly one this big.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 13th June, 2000

14th Aug 2001, 10:16

55-60MPG is never going to happen. The best fuel economy the handbook gives is 35MPG and even that seems a little unrealistic.

9th Sep 2001, 09:08

WHAT!? If a 2.0 petrol car can achieve 35 I'm SURE a diesel can!

26th Oct 2001, 12:43

I wrote the original entry, and I can assure anybody that these economy figures are realistic. I recently drove to the North of Scotland and back from Huntingdon via Edinburgh and returned via the West Coast, and my economy readings were 56.8mpg, 57.2mpg, 58.0mpg and 55.4mpg. I would be interested to hear of a replacement vehicle that I could expect similar economy from.

15th Dec 2001, 06:07

We had a late model (95 reg.) diesel estate, which provided excellent service and economy from 24k to 80k.

Best achieved was 58mpg. Although it was never less than 50mpg.

With better rust-proofing and a bit more style, these cars would have been world beaters.

The newer Rover L-series diesel is definitely worth a look - more power, quieter and same economy.

Drive the flag.

14th Oct 2003, 06:06

I have found that 55 mpg is realistic. I did one test running a full tank right down on mainly motorway driving, sticking to the 70 mph limit and got just over 60 mpg.

As seems to be the case with everyone else, rust is letting me down. However, if you want cheap, large car motoring, the diesel estate takes some beating. I should know, I have two of them!

6th Apr 2005, 07:05

I have owned a turbo diesel estate for 3 yrs and can vouch for the easy 50 mile per gallon. I should know this as I have clocked over 50,000 miles on it from well over 100,000.

Penny for penny, mile for mile a very reliable motor, just make sure you wash it weekly!!! door bottoms bonnet front and boot lid bottom and especially rear wheel arches love rust, although I am lucky except the latter.

They are a fast roomy economical workhorse, ashame they stopped production in 94...i would without doubt be looking for a newer one otherwise.

1992 Rover - Austin Montego Clubman Estate 1.6 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
Engine and transmission 1.6 petrol
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 4 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.4 / 10

Faults:

Clutch after 128,000 miles and 2 learner drivers, alternator, wheel arch rust.

General Comments:

Reliable workhorse. Even though it only has a 1.6, acceleration is reasonable. Load space is great, I've moved house, bands, firewood, etc. The car is a charm on the motorway, and gets better mpg at 80 mph than at 70!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 31st January, 1999

1992 Rover - Austin Montego DSLX Estate 2.0 turbo diesel from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
Engine and transmission 2.0 turbo diesel
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10

Faults:

Nothing, just normal service parts such as tyres, exhaust, shock absorbers etc.

General Comments:

We have had this car for 5 years and it has now done 241,000 miles. It never breaks down and it does 50 mpg. The service interval is 12,000 miles. I have driven it all over Europe, towed boats and caravans with it and for a family estate it is ideal. I cannot find any current model that can match the performance, economy, reliability and other capabilities of this car.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 10th January, 1999

18th Oct 2002, 16:01

I have had "Monty" for four years, I bought it because I did work for an ambulance service so it was ideal. a) it's white. b) it's roomy. c) it's very cheap to run - 50mpg plus.

I've had no major problems. I had a clutch replaced in Spain (where it took all the family/trailer tent/topbox/kitchen sink at 45mpg) and only realised it was slipping cos the shaft thru the gearbox casing was seizing (a fault I'd had on a maestro TD - same engine/box), the clutch plate was fine... DOH!

Monty has done 150,000 miles and flies thru each MOT once I've turned the diesel pump down to pass emissions, then back up for a little more speed.

As a workhorse you can't fault it, and I've got the 7 seat kit from a scrapyard for £20!

BUT... tempus fugit, and I am now about to re-live my youth, I don't need "frugal" or "spacy", so Monty has to go. After 4 years and two trips to Spain, it will be a wrench, but I need a 2.8i Capri (or same), so thanks Monty, it's been cheap!..er, fun...

Average review marks: 7.4 / 10, based on 7 reviews