2002 MG ZR 120+ from UK and Ireland - Comments

My head gasket blew at just under 50,000 miles, costing £800 to fix.

Mid and back section of the exhaust rusted through at 45,000 miles.

A small piece of small plastic trim has come off the door handle on the passenger side.

Goes well and sounds great when revved.

Pulls well in all gears and smoothly right up to the 7k red line.

Very nice to drive with direct heavy steering and a heavy clutch.

Handles like it's on rails at both low and high speeds.

Plenty of feel through the steering and brakes. Good brakes with discs all round.

Very hard ride though and very noisy on the motorway, so it's not a good cruiser, but then it's not designed to be!

All in all, I'm very happy with the car, and I'd happily buy it again

I can't believe you gave it 8/10 for performance, I raced my mate with a 1.8 MG ZR120 in a straight line drag race and was neck and neck with him. Only problem is I was in a 1.3 8v 106!

OK so it sounds bad when I say it like that, in reality it was a 100bhp 1.3 rallye. My point is 120 Bhp from a 1.8 16v is very poor. This car is SLOW for what it is and I can't see any redeeming features. It's not reliable (53k and the head gasket goes? Typical Rover) looks OK but nothing special, and it's so heavy it's just not fun to drive!

You want a quickish car that handles nicely, get a 1.4 XSi or a Rallye, 1 day in that and you'll forget what a ZR is!

Not gonna say the zr is a fast car as its not particularly, but it isn't slow. Most N/A 1.8 16v petrols produce that sort of power... focus 1.8, astra 1.8, corsa sri 1.8, etc etc the list goes on-if it has the vvc head on it then it produces more but that's not the point.

You drive a peugeot 106...LOL! The MG is easily as reliable and miles better looking, safer and nicer interior. Your comment was ruined by your reasoning-if you don't think it deserves an 8 out of ten then fine, I probably agree, but compared to other cars with 1.8 engines (no vtecs or turbos) it is very similar.