Rovertech 2.0

Posted: **Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:21 pm**

For various reasons this week, I've been looking at ZTs...

I found this on another forum -

mgr wrote:Little tip, do a smooth shift at 4k and if you can control the clutch and slip it just a little at the right moment when 2nd engages, the damn thing goes like a rocket.

Also, been practicing my 2nd gear starts (I said I would) and the results are stunning. I think 0 - 60 in sub 6 seconds, may be 5 are very realistic without welding the clutch don't worry.

Reason being, we all know it's very low ration at bottom end, so a smooth off the line in second allows you to hit 60 without changing gear. The time you lose getting away in second is made back 10 fold by not needing another change. So 60 is hit in one gear! I have been doing 2nd gears starts so much on the way to work I only use 1st for hill starts now. And the clutch doesnt suffer at all because it is fully disengaged at the same time it would in 1st to get moving with no more strain.

Are the ZT 190's really that quick?

Posted: **Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:24 pm**

0-60 in sub 6 seconds?

I somehow doubt that. Yes, if you have the low end torque, pulling away in second makes for a nice quick dash to 60 (I've tried it a couple of times in the SDi, definitely shaves some time off the line!), but no way in hell would it improve matters that much.

What's the standard 0-60 dash time on one of those?

Posted: **Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:31 pm**

BrackenFox wrote:What's the standard 0-60 dash time on one of those?

7.7 s according to the brochure I have.

Posted: **Sun Apr 01, 2007 7:53 pm**

No where near that quick, in fact in real life most tests show about 8.3 seconds.

My derv would have em now!

Posted: **Sun Apr 01, 2007 10:28 pm**

CDT for the win! I know of a nice one sale too!

Posted: **Mon Apr 02, 2007 12:12 am**

Not sure whats funnier the sub 6 seconds to 60 or the diesel talk...

Posted: **Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:04 pm**

Sounds like quite a claim

I can't see 2nd gear starts being faster either...

Posted: **Mon Apr 02, 2007 1:57 pm**

I wonder how it was timed - maybe using a wrist watch or counting "one-elephant, two-elephant, three...."

Posted: **Mon Apr 02, 2007 3:21 pm**

tried a second gear start on the TI all i got was massive clutch slip and a nasty smell of a dying clutch

the geeza with the ZT must be a dreamer or was that handy andy? LOL

Posted: **Tue Apr 03, 2007 9:56 pm**

will try it on friday when i pick mine up

Posted: **Tue Apr 03, 2007 9:58 pm**

zozzie_9t9 wrote:I wonder how it was timed - maybe using a wrist watch or counting "one-elephant, two-elephant, three...."

Posted: **Tue Apr 03, 2007 9:59 pm**

Maybe we should all start quoting our 0-60 times in elephants?

Posted: **Wed Apr 04, 2007 12:05 am**

to be fair it always feels quicker than it actually is though

Posted: **Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:36 pm**

Is the 190 the RWD one?

A lad at work has just got one (the 190 that is) and is insisting on a drag race. Reckon my Ti will 'ave 'im? (Private land)

Posted: **Wed Apr 04, 2007 10:56 pm**

MrFlibbles wrote:Is the 190 the RWD one?

No, the 260 V8 is the RWD one.

In a straight line the ti should win....

This was a rather good reply I got when I asked how the performance compared on mgr -

mgr wrote:I used to own a 620ti, and now have a ZT190. The ti was not exactly standard mind. It had an uprated turbo, dump valve, re-map, wheels, lowered, bodykit, smoothed plate recess.... nice car...

Day to day she ran 220BHP, but could be turned up to close to 240 for the odd occasion. I don't know how she performed in terms of 0-60, but she was a lot faster than my ZT. The ZT is is currently standard, bar a SS exhaust, and she'll probably stay that way.

SPEED
The ZT is much smoother, being a v6, and doesn't have to be on boost to give you the power. The low down torque of the ZT also makes a real difference in day to day usability. If the two cars were in a straight race, the ti would win.

HANDLING
The ZT being completely standards handles... pretty much the same as the ti, but the 600 had suspension upgrades, brake upgrades etc etc... A race involving braking, cornering etc etc would be close. The ZT would take the ti on corners, but the turbo would be back again in the straights. A standard ti however would be walked all over by the handling of the standard ZT. (in my opinion at least)

OVERALL
I would have the ZT. Even if the ti was the same age and the same mileage as the ZT, I would miss the comfort of the ZT. Day to day the ZT is quicker as you don't have to think about the turbo spooling up, loosing boost on changes, etc etc etc... Unless your driving everywhere in a hurry, and in high revs, the MG will seem quicker, as the power is right there all the time.

The one thing i miss about the ti is the dump valve. If my MG had the same vvvvvvrrrrmmm tttttttssssshhhhhhh as the turbo, i'd be a happy man.

Hope that helps...

Posted: **Thu Apr 05, 2007 2:01 pm**

7.7 is about as good as it gets in a 190. Thats a good driver doing it right. Even in my turbo, which should be 6.4, its hard to get it below 7 on anything but good smooth grippy roads.

Posted: **Thu Apr 05, 2007 7:25 pm**

oooo a remap on a Ti

Posted: **Tue Apr 10, 2007 8:54 pm**

picked my ztt 190 up on friday, and its definately not as quick to 60 as the Ti, but the handling even for a massive car is leagues ahead of the Ti

Chucking the Ti down windy roads was bit of a scary business seem to always be on the egde, the zt is lot more surefooted and feels lot more stable