Rover - Austin P6 Reviews - Page 3 of 3

1972 Rover - Austin P6 S 3.5 V-8 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1972
Engine and transmission 3.5 V-8 petrol
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 2 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.8 / 10

Faults:

Collapsed water pump, burnt out ignition contacts, front and rear shock absorbers. Noisy hydraulic tappets, worn camshaft.

General Comments:

The old Rover is a superb performer still clocking 0-60 in just under 9 seconds. The ride quality is superb, and the handling is again pretty good for a 26 year old motor (although the suspension could do with being stiffer). Fuel consumption is horrendous (8mpg) around town, but who cares when you can scare the pants off XR owners?

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 22nd March, 1998

23rd Feb 2001, 06:33

If you are only getting 8 miles to the gallon something is seriously wrong! You should get around 19 / 23 to the gallon.

These cars are the forgotten classic. Easy to work on, parts are easy to get and they turn heads like nothing else on the road. If you want the best look for a Monza red car with buckskin (cream) leather interior. If anyone needs help to locate a car then email me on roverman@strayduck.com

29th Aug 2001, 07:31

Great to see a P6 review. These are seriously under rated cars, and like you say frighten the life out of XR/GTi/Civic drivers. On the note of fuel consumption (which should be around 18-22 MPG) I read an article some time ago about fitting different carbs, which I suspect is what you need. Holly and Weber 4 choke carbs were found to increase power, torque and fuel consumption. Worth keeping in mind if you decide to up-rate.

17th Jun 2003, 11:44

The Rover p6 is a great classic and a piece of Great British motoring history. Mike Sturrock (Inverness)

18th Jun 2007, 06:35

I have owned an example of every P6 model. Moreover, I have owned many other makes so feel that I can comment without bias.

My thoughts are these:

1./ The Rover 2000 automatic is an absolute slug.

2./ The Rover 2000 manual is a bit of a slug.

3./ The Rover 2000TC is quite fun to drive (I used to do a 2000 kilometre round-trip in it over 3 days, once a month), but slightly sluggish.

4./ The Rover 3500 V8 automatic is just brilliant, and the extra power allows one to forget about acceleration issues and marvel at what a fine handling and intelligently designed car the P6 really is.

5./ The Rover 3500S V8 manual is a cracking motor vehicle! Don't take my word for it, just, but a good one and start giving Jags a run for their money. (Trust me, they're fabulous. Once you've owned one you'll never turn back).

But that's just my opinion...

28th Jun 2014, 02:39

Not noticeably faster than a 2000 in SC form, it just has more mid range torque. The 2200 TC is not far off as quick as the V8.

Average review marks: 7.5 / 10, based on 7 reviews