ZS180 pretty quick motors

[cdti]

£1500 for a 40hp increase is pretty good on a N/A is pretty good, its common knoledge its cheaper to tune a turbo'd motor in comparison to N/A. Think about how much it would cost to gain 40hp on a N/A MR2?

[matt_mr2t]

I know it is, that's why I think spending that kind of money on any NA for a pretty average power increase is a bit of a waste of money.

[cdti]

but you'll have something special and different. Its like my ZR, I had the non-VVC 1.8 version, basically 115bhp, but by spending a bit of dosh on cams, vernier pulleys, a VVC inlet manifold and a catback, it was RR'd at 130hp. But it felt like a totally different car, and the sound was just immense, IMO it was more than worth the money spent.

Obviously it wasn't amazingly fast, but everythime I drove it, I had a smile on my face.

[GBTurbo]

I looked at getting one of these but I bought a rover 620 turbo in the end for £650!

They are good handlers but the cambelts will need doing which is quite a labour intensive job plus the high tax bracket put me off to be honest. I'd probably be tempted by the zt v8 thing but again high tax bracket.

Buy an mr2 turbo

[cdti]

I would, if they werent so expensive to run and if they were cheaper also. You can pick up a MK1 180 with belts done for £2K with relatively low mileage. The tax is only slightly more expensive than the turbo!

[matt_mr2t]

but you'll have something special and different. Its like my ZR, I had the non-VVC 1.8 version, basically 115bhp, but by spending a bit of dosh on cams, vernier pulleys, a VVC inlet manifold and a catback, it was RR'd at 130hp. But it felt like a totally different car, and the sound was just immense, IMO it was more than worth the money spent.

Obviously it wasn't amazingly fast, but everythime I drove it, I had a smile on my face.

So you spent quite a few hundred, even thousand to get 15bhp?
And you think that was worth it?

In the nicest possible way, you're a bit nuts

Btw, to the fans of the ZS180 how about going for a little more "class" and looking at the ZT190 instead?

http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/news/defau ... ryId=21883

The extra power would be negated by the extra weight, but it's a whole other class of car on the inside. One that wouldnt make me want to stab myself in the eyes so regularly.

[cdti]

£400 it cost over the course of a year, im not going to spend thousands on any car

[matt_mr2t]

Each to their own, but IMO, even that's too much money for very little difference. You can gain that much from a good service sometimes.

On some cars that's the difference between premium & super unleaded.

[GBTurbo]

I would, if they werent so expensive to run and if they were cheaper also. You can pick up a MK1 180 with belts done for £2K with relatively low mileage. The tax is only slightly more expensive than the turbo!

This is true, when I was looking (2 years ago+) they were going to be put in the £400 or whatever tax bracket by April 2010 according to parkers tax guide. But i've just checked and its the same as my car to tax!

[rhamps]

I owned one of these and there poo poo rubbish mpg and tiny power handling was pants too. Only thing going for it was the v6 sound but tbh that was not very nice either.


(Might be really critical atm as just been driving the New nissan GTR around today) lol

[Ben]

Well funnily enough, I've just bought one - and I'm really impressed with it! The engine is a peach and the handling is great too. Much better than the Mk3 Supra I swapped it for

[cdti]

I owned one of these and there poo poo rubbish mpg and tiny power handling was pants too. Only thing going for it was the v6 sound but tbh that was not very nice either.


(Might be really critical atm as just been driving the New nissan GTR around today) lol

MPG-its a V6 what were you expecting? And if your saying it had tiny power and pants handling, you must have picked up a sh1tter. Its the best handling FWD car ive ever driven and a lot of people agree that that's its strongest point.

Best thing this car does though is eat up the miles on the motorway, Ive been driving it lots in the past few weeks.

[cdti]

Well funnily enough, I've just bought one - and I'm really impressed with it! The engine is a peach and the handling is great too. Much better than the Mk3 Supra I swapped it for

MK1/MK2? Any mods planned?

[Ben]

Well funnily enough, I've just bought one - and I'm really impressed with it! The engine is a peach and the handling is great too. Much better than the Mk3 Supra I swapped it for

MK1/MK2? Any mods planned?

Mk1

http://www.imoc.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?t=134670

[matt_mr2t]

I owned one of these and there poo poo rubbish mpg and tiny power handling was pants too. Only thing going for it was the v6 sound but tbh that was not very nice either.


(Might be really critical atm as just been driving the New nissan GTR around today) lol

MPG-its a V6 what were you expecting? And if your saying it had tiny power and pants handling, you must have picked up a sh1tter. Its the best handling FWD car ive ever driven and a lot of people agree that that's its strongest point.

Best thing this car does though is eat up the miles on the motorway, Ive been driving it lots in the past few weeks.

I think what he may have been getting at with the MPG is that for 180bhp why does it need a 2.5L V6 that uses up the juice?
They themselves make the 1.8 VVTI engine from the MGTF with 160bhp which I should imagine could have been stretched to nearer 180bhp with a few more CC's and would return far better economy.

For me, bad MPG is worth it when you have something like a 300bhp 350Z, but not in a 180bhp ZS.

There's plenty of cars out there with around that power that are going to be less juicey and less money to tax but equally, if not more, fun to drive.

And I bet there's a heck of a lot of FWD cars out there that would knock spots off it for handling. You're opening up a huge debate there.

Just off the top of my head, Integra Type R, Civic Type R, all sports Clio's, RS Megans, Focus RS & ST models. I'm sure if I sat here for 10 minutes I could list another 20 FWD cars held in much higher regard for handling.

They're not bad cars, but I wouldnt say they were as good as any of the cars I listed in terms of power, speed and handling.

[BarronMR]

[BarronMR]

double post oops

[BarronMR]

I think what he may have been getting at with the MPG is that for 180bhp why does it need a 2.5L V6 that uses up the juice?
They themselves make the 1.8 VVTI engine from the MGTF with 160bhp which I should imagine could have been stretched to nearer 180bhp with a few more CC's and would return far better economy.

Needs the torque not so much the peak power to move the vehicle around in reasonable fashion at lower engine speeds due to the extra 200kg or so over the zr and mgf (1.8 engined cars)

For me, bad MPG is worth it when you have something like a 300bhp 350Z, but not in a 180bhp ZS.

Zs180 does 5more mpg than the 350z, not bad considering you don't get any of the manufacturers gimic's to bump that figure i.e. sport buttons to reduce throttle response and improve official mpg figures.

I don't worry about this, I'm diesel powered 55mpg and Zs180 suspension

And I bet there's a heck of a lot of FWD cars out there that would knock spots off it for handling. You're opening up a huge debate there.

Just off the top of my head, Integra Type R, Civic Type R, all sports Clio's, RS Megans, Focus RS & ST models.

I wouldn't bank on it

As I said earlier in this thread (or the other one lol). The rover 45/mgzs IS pretty much the Integra type R chassis. The ITR was based on the current civic of the time, which was a shared chassis with rover group (400). The civic-integra main differences were a change in length (shortened), structural improvements (stiffened).

MG tuned the 45 chassis similarly to create the ZS180, granted not to the degree honda did (a bit hardcore for most road situations), but they did pretty damn well.

Its got the same double wishbone front and multi link rear ITR setup, with dual valved shockers and stiffened springs ARB's etc...

Read this.

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarr ... s_180.html

Thats 4* rating from Evo magazine and they only knocked it for the image.

Quote from review
"Over a challenging stretch of black-top the ZS's combination of keen steering, fine body control, stonking acceleration and well-judged damping would surprise a few established evo favourites. Turn-in is incisive and confidence inspiring, fast corners reveal a neutral balance, and mid-corner bumps fail to find holes in the ZS 180's thoroughly well-sorted chassis."

I'd bet that you can't get a better FWD sports orientated car for same money (as little as 1k). Simply because of the badge.

I'm sure if I sat here for 10 minutes I could list another 20 FWD cars held in much higher regard for handling.

Go on then name 20 more that ARE better, not a list based on peoples opinions who haven't driven one.

[Ben]

Just off the top of my head, Integra Type R, Civic Type R, all sports Clio's, RS Megans, Focus RS & ST models. I'm sure if I sat here for 10 minutes I could list another 20 FWD cars held in much higher regard for handling.

Yes, but try and pick up a decent example of any of those for under £2k.

Plus the mpg is so far proving to be waaay better than my 240bhp Supra.

Matt, if you ever get a change to drive one of these I suggest you take it. Yes, there is a whole myriad of good-handling fwd cars but I have been absolutely blown awayu by the zed. The suspension, steering and brakes are so confidence inspiring - it is nothing short of brilliant. The V6 is an absolute peach - really torquey low down and very revvy when you give it the beans thanks to the 7k red line. I've had far more fun in the last two days than I did in either my MR2 or the Supra over the last two years. It handles better than my Mk1 hands down.

[cdti]

The 4 pots need to be revved hard to get the power out, you dont really want to be doing that in a 180, as the fuel consumption difference will be no more than 5MPG id imagine. I had a ZR120, much lighter car, and on average I got 33MPG, not amazing really. The 160 is not going to be more economical, especially in a bigger car.

Ben i agree with you totally mate, I have more fun driving the 180 than the MR2, partly because i havent got the confidence to give the 2 a bootful incase i end up in a hedge or something, and the 180 just gives you so much confidence when you boot it.

I think its definitely a car to consider under 2K. What other cars are as quick, handle as well, and are comfortable to drive under 2K?