2005 MG ZS 180 from UK and Ireland - Comments

Nothing.

Bought for bang on half RRP from a dealer clearance sale 3 weeks ago. No warranty, and the dealer has just gone bust, so no come back at all.

When you can pick up a very quick, very capable sports saloon for the price of a lower mid spec Toyota Yaris however, you can make allowances. Parts are not a problem as there are 2 million MG Rover cars on British roads, and several companies are catering for them.

The V6 engine is smooth and powerful, and returns about 25 mpg average. Performance and handling both sensational, and as a driver's car, this blows my 2000 VW Bora V5 away in every respect. Build quality is above average, but the details and interior are dated.

I will put about 100k on the car over the next two years as part of my work. Therefore residual values are irrelevant, and at £8,500 for a 180 PS V6, sub-7 second 0-60 time and a corking chassis, I'm not griping. I intend to carry out all basic maintenance myself, and I have already confirmed with several local specialists that they can diagnose and repair any engine management or electrical problems.

On the evidence of this car, Rover didn't deserve to meet such a sad end. The ZS's only faults really are dated styling and details. Handling, engine and ride beat the Bora, build quality and comfort are only just behind. Other manufacturers did (do) far worse. At RRP it was even good value. Great drivers car but practical for the family too.

Will update as the miles go on.

I agree - it seems the recent MG Rover products highlighted the gulf between the motoring press and the real world. These cars were universally given "avoid at all costs" reviews, yet seem to receive nothing but praise from owners. At the end of the day, owners views are far more valid than those of motoring journos, many of whom get free, fully expensed cars to tool around in and wouldn't know, or much less care, what buying and running a car out of your own pocket to perform a set of real world tasks is like. As for the wannabe Clarksons and that odd type who tend to choose turgidly dull BMW 316i's over a better but "lesser badged" equivalent, they frankly wouldn't know a decent car if it smacked them between the eyes.

I have come to the conclusion that one's opinion of MG Rover, and the ZS in particular, is dictated primarily by how corrupted you are by that little bit of fashion victim that resides in all of us. For example, I have proven my factory standard ZS180 to be no slower around the Brands Hatch Indy circuit than a Clio 182 Cup or a Civic Type-R, and just as involving and entertaining as either on the road - in fact in my opinion it eclipses the Civic. Unlike the others it also has the added features of seating five in comfort, boasting a vast boot, and being comfortable and refined enough to drive for 600 miles at a time with no fatigue or aches. In terms of what it does, it's an absolute cracker (apart from <25 mpg economy).

None of this was mentioned in any detail in any review I read, so I have not read a car magazine since. They were wrong about this car from my point of view, so why pay to read more reviews that are probably wrong from my view too?

As with the title of my review of the ZS. "read the owners reviews not the press reviews"

The press are only interested in something new. Today that means an interior like a cheap stereo and everything else compromised to reduce cost. The ZS/45 platform was engineered just before cost became THE major driver of new vehicle development. It is none the worse for that.

Stock up on Head Gaskets etc, the KV6 is Crap!

No other car in its price range comes close in performance or handling.

Had my 180 for 18 months now, been to Spain and back twice in it in that time maintaining high speeds all the way and it was faultless. Love the thing to bits and it sounds fantastic, just it's thirst prevents it being perfect.

It's only ignorant and ill-informed comments like those from that dope about the KV6 being "crap" that irritate a bit.

Top motor for the money.

I agree, the car is fantastic, so much so I want to change my Saab 93 Aero for one, the only problem is I can't find a 4 door x power grey one with full leather for love or money. As soon as I can find one I'll be the first to buy...HELP!!!

Where do I go now?

I've had my ZS 180 for nearly 3 years and had nothing wrong with it. Nothing. Nada. Rein.

I am considering other options now with the demise of MG Rover and struggling to come up with a viable solution. All reviews of my shortlist highlight problems with the build quality of the cars, issues with the dealers and so on. I have had no problems with MG Rover or their cars. this is my second in 6 years and I have covered over 120000 miles in total with no need for Roadside assistance cover.

Why is it the British press got away with slating supurb cars at every opportunity?

0-60 is 7.3. crappy mg? what do you drive? considering these cars can be picked up for the price of a 1800 focus. its the best in its range. don't mock until you drive one. proper drivers car like integra. very sturdy feel. got a strong engine capable of a lot of power. my pals got a aus import 230 supercharged and that will beat a m3in a sprint to 140 no worries. 0-60 in around 4.5 seconds and.

I eat crappy saxo all day, saxo are built crap, totally different set-up to 45. mg prob werent even racing. these are proper cars compared to your french p.o.s, my old rover 214si demolished vts, so what you goin on about?

As too previous statement about saxo vtr, 180's can keep up type-r's how can a vtr with 120bhp max even contend. typical boy racer who this his little hatch is the best. I would even bother racing a saxo because they're a waste of time.

Mg zs180 (rover 45) will do 0-60 in 8.4 sec, 0-100 in 24.2 sec.

NO FASTER...PERIOD!!!

SLOW if you ask me.

My mate has one and its barely faster than my fiesta z-tec s, people who own mg like to give overblown claims, when in reality they are poor quality ageing cars for old men.

...Reason for rover going bust was they couldnt produce decent cars!!

8.4 without engaging 1st gear. these were the last mg's to be built. i'v got a lap counter a so on and I've had it at 7.2, so what you goin on about. citroen are french crap, this is a proper car, where do you live i'l show you, you wouldn't even stand a chance. your just jealous, your mate probably has the 1600 version.

8.4 is rover 45 specs not mgzs.

Zetec-s, yeh whatever. I own a zetec-s with turbo conversion, and my pals mg180 leaves me in his wake. you must be racing the 2.0 rover v6. overblown claims look on mg website and everywhere else. vtr is 10.0 0-60 pathetic top speed 115. crap.

The person who wrote the bit about has vtr being faster, obviously didn't go to school, because a simple case of mathematics will tell you that the power is nowhere near not even the vts comes close on power to weight ratio, let alone torque. these cars will eat saxo all day, I wiped the floor with a 98 xj8 4.2 supercharged, i'd like to see your little saxo. also the 180 is 25bhp per tonne less than an older m3 conv as they weigh nearly almost 2tonnes, gives it only 162/tonne.