75ZT Community

As we don't seem to have many topics and threads in this section do we have an extremely reliable engine and running gear fitted to our cars, tongue in cheek, lots of posts about the heavy oil burners.

Well if anything it should promote some healthy banter.

Or should i just.

Andrew wrote:As we don't seem to have many topics and threads in this section do we have an extremely reliable engine and running gear fitted to our cars, tongue in cheek, lots of posts about the heavy oil burners.

Well if anything it should promote some healthy banter.

Or should i just.

Yeah! "Everybody" knows just how unreliable these K engines are!

The only real engine specific issue that I've had was a leaky thermostat area which I've fixed with the aluminium housing from Kaiser in South Africa. I'm very pleased with this and have driven a rapid near 5000 miles since fitting it in March, with no loss of water whatsoever.

Andrew wrote:As we don't seem to have many topics and threads in this section do we have an extremely reliable engine and running gear fitted to our cars,

In a word?

Yes

Hmmm, I had a bulb blow once...does that count? I HAVE only done 25k miles in her myself though..

Zeb wrote:Hmmm, I had a bulb blow once...does that count? I HAVE only done 25k miles in her myself though..

That would be the special bulb only on the KV6, I can't find mine, perhaps it's blown too?

Yup Those D@m K series things..

We paid the staggering fee of 400 quids for Our metro and after nearly 5 years we only got £150 for it.

And !!! that rubbish K Series was just starting to show signs of possible HGF (Head Gasket Failure).too... after only 104,000 miles.

I am not getting another one !!!....................................................................

Chris

I have spent quite a bit on preventive maintenance on my 2002 Conny CDTi auto, probably close on £1,000.. not had any actual breakdowns though... Funny that innit?

My cars done almost 150K now.. And according to the prev owner, (she did 135K in it) it never failed to get her where she wanted to go.. Her comment was:- "It must have been built on a Wednesday by happy, caring people".

I hope she was right! *fingers crossed* ..

Though I should add that the car is booked in for two new front wheel bearings on the 6th September, plus new front brake pipes (they look a bit iffy) and its MOT...
...

Mines had a new fan, new water pump, new thermostat, and needed the orange clip fitting. Now the cambelts are due and it eats a lot of tyres! I wish it had a bigger load space to acomodate the full size spare and all my gear! (LPG (Liquified Petroleum Gas) tank in the spare well)

Thought I would resurrect this rather than start another. Since owning the ZT I've always been led to believe that the V6s are by far and away the better of the petrol engines. However looking on one of the Landy forums they seem to have the opinion that they are not that good, being suscepitble to HGF and that they were originally that bad they had to be recalled back to the factory for repairs? Surely not correct? I've a downloded a lengthy topic on the subject can I repeat some of it here to see what people think please?

From my experience they are not talking about our V6's. One of the most reliable 24 valve Quad Cam V6 made. HGF being almost unheard of. Although I have heard of a couple.
The previous iteration as fitted to some Rover 800 was quite problematic.

Here's an extract:

V6 also suffers head gasket failure too. Less so than the 1.8’s, compared to what the LR main dealers I’ve had the misfortune to deal with say , but it’s difficult to compare fail percentages to the 1.8’s. Mainly due to there being a much lesser percentage of Freelanders with v6’s fitted. More often than not hgf failure on a v6 seems to be a secondary problem, after something else goes wrong first. Like coolant loss. Many garages avoid all rover petrols full stop. Dun’t matter what car it’s in. v6’s can drink a v8 under the table, which is probably why they is cheap. Basically anyone buying a petrol needs to (shoot them selves ) do a sniff test on the coolant or face a bill for repair at some point. V6’s can slip liners, suffer with cracked thermostat houses and are generally more expensive on parts. When the td4 came out at the same time as the v6, it was already well known of the 1.8 Freelander (and v6’s in rover cars, but not Freelanders at this point) hgf problems and overheating . The diesels were better and gave better mpg too. So many went for the diesel option. Rover had had a bad time with petrol’s before, regardless of LR having problems with the 1.8’s. Many mods were done to try to fix problems on the v6 (also known as the rover kv6 and used in rovers for many years). The v6’s had dampers fitted to the rear of each exhaust camshaft to stop the camshaft from shattering. The v6 had the stainless steel head gaskets too I think. At one point the v6 was so bad in the rovers, a recall was done. This was said to be so difficult for garages that the recalled rovers were sent back to the factory for the corrective work to be completed . LR then went and put the v6 in the Freelander. A cheap quick idea for the USA market. You’d have thought this would have been spotted as a potential problem, but we think bmw saw it as a cheap option. Bastids. The 1.8’s were attacked by the bean counters to reduce costs in manufacture and assembly. Plastic dowels to stop the metal ones from causing gasket damage when chucking, shorry assembling the engines . Plastic dowels = heads move about over time = gasket failure more often . Differing metals used heating up and expanding at different rates in the head, causing more movement. So there’s some serious fundamental problems here. Hence why rover as a company int here anymore . Known for problems and unreliable. Shame really. Funny thing was LR spotted these problems or must have been aware of them. LR Freelander petrol engines were said to be built adjacent to rover ones, even though they're the same (or very much so), as they were said to be separated in build as they wanted a higher tolerance on the LR Freelander petrol’s to stop the failures. Bastids went and put LR failed spec engines/parts in rovers . Hence why buying a diesel Freelander is much better. Been reading up on all this…

Authors words?

As I said it appears to refer to early V6 from Rover 800 series and this person has taken that information to read true for the later KV6 that we know and love. The only relevant point is the reference to thermostat housings AFAICT

When we were just about to buy our 190, a friend of ours who worked for a LR garage, said 'ooh not one of those 2.5s, we've got one in and it's been a nightmare!' Whether or not the extra weight of the freelander puts extra strain on the engine, I don't know. Did it stop us buying one? Not a prayer.

MGR also had problems with the early 2001/2002 190 engines where a number practically destroyed themselves, what this is down to I don't know. I have also heard that it is relatively easy to snap the cams in the KV6 too when doing top end work

On the plus side the KV6 doesn't offer too bad a fuel consumption and its power/litre leaves it sat between the Audi 2.8 (174) and BMW 2.5 (197). However Interestingly when comparing 0-60 times, MGR compared the 190s time against a BMW 318i, (only 120bhp 4 cylinder) as opposed to what would be it's match at the time - the 328i M-Sport. (I'm guessing because the 328i would have taken the 190 to the cleaners!)

The 2.5s are also a stroked unit, as opposed to increasing the bore. This lead to, in the 190 having an engine that doesn't particularly like to rev, hence was countered with an at times ridiculously short ratio gear box, where 4th and 5th don't offer a great deal of difference between the two. I think had MGR properly developed the supercharged version, carrying out the necessary work properly to the engine then that would have been a real beast.

I've not yet had the opportunity to drive either of the auto versions in the 2.0 or 2.5, however it seems that the auto box mates well with the V6.

I appreciate that the above makes me sound horrifically negative towards MGR, which is not intended considering I adore these cars, however I am realistic in that there is stuff out there that beats them and raises the question whether or not the tiny niggles and flaws these cars have, are what make them as special/cherished as they are? As motors, they are significantly underrated, which can be put down to bad press on BMW at launch, but certainly the phoenix 4, who despite being left with a company that was in a better state than it had been for some time, managed to right royally cock it up.

2005 75 2.5 Auto

When I retired from my business I had a Mazda MX5 for fun and a Fiat Ducato van from the business.

The Fiat had been a discreet ’incident clear up’ ambulance (I confess I did romanticise it a bit and daydreamed it might have a been for all I knew a ‘Ministry’ black ops job, tidying up after clandestine activity by some Andy McNab character). There were rails around the inner sides to allow two tiers of coffins at the same time (capacity was 10 stiffs apparently) and steel plates on the floor with peg holes in them to stop body roll (animal, veg, or mineral not specified). Of course, I suppose in extenuating circumstances one could always squeeze two paddlers in one canoe to increase profits, but one has to maintain the niceties and consider taste, if only occasionally. I did, however, make mental notes not to accept any night time jobs. There was one incident which might have resulted in an involuntary escape of transitory digestive material but that will remain for another, less sober, day.

Anyway, with the cessation of hostilities between me and the occasional burglars, and the bounced cheques from the posh-er clientele following my retirement, I decided to, well, not move on, more just keep moving. I’d had the last of a succession of P6’s (all variants) some 15 years before and after that two Silver Shadows, a BMW 525 and an XJ40. I started hankering after another P6 but tooth length was too big a consideration by then so started looking at 75’s in earnest.

I had never driven one but they appeared to be a worthy successor to my much adored P6’s. I searched for what I thought (hoped) was the right one for over a year, was nearly discouraged by several frogs, and finally found what appeared to be what I was looking for. Forums such as this and others were incredibly valuable for the wealth of information and real help and I’m convinced I would have made very expensive mistakes and had a miserable life without them.

I’ve now had it for three years. Apart from regular service items and preventative maintenance, the only thing I have had fail is the original battery (from 2005). The car is kept in the open on my driveway all the time. It has never once let me down, either in operation or expectation. The K engine, like the rest of the car, has never missed a beat or caused any concern. It returns overall around 32 mpg and I discover something new about it every week. Although I check weekly the coolant, oil, and hydraulic fluid, other than annual oil changes they never have needed topping up.
Rather reminds of our early marital experience, other than the being kept on the driveway in all weathers, obviously.

I read the constant posts elsewhere about terrible experiences and thank the one chap who had her before me for the regular servicing he’d given her and am glad I have opted to spread the cost of proper upkeep over her life rather than in great lumps following an emergency. Oh, and these forums too. Again, no marital inferences should drawn.