Rovertech 2.0

OK, i emailed a guy locally about his car wondering what nick it was in, and we got onto talking about my Rover. He after a swap for this:









thing is, i reckon i could make more than the rovers worth in parts. Any comments or ideas? Bad or good idea?

No tax and test he reckons it will need only a windscreen for test (which in fairness wont be much fully comp - maybe £50 excess). Havent seen it, presuming its worse than it looks.

944? pants car, more than likely to be falling to bits on a 1984 car, which engine? the 2.5 16v is crap too

looks as if it is rotten around the front screen(common),so Will is the turbo a crap car too?

Its a 944 2.5 nasp 16v.

To be honest ive looked on ebay and theyre going to pennies. not worth the hassle imo, i just got off the phone to him and he added "the fuel line is knackered so its a non runner".

Might not be so hard to fit a temp fuel line, just depends where its gone, and how its broken.

Reckons its had an engine overhaul 100miles ago with paperwork. He also says there is no rust except some on a skirt, which he has email me a picture, and looks surface.

And people slate ARG BL Rover for their choice of interior colours!

Is that mould on the steering wheel?

Not sure. Going to see it friday afternoon, see how easy it will be to repair the fuel line.

Anything else gone will really push the idea back - i bet a set of disks or an exhaust isnt cheap.

hoody wrote:looks as if it is rotten around the front screen(common),so Will is the turbo a crap car too?

i dont know, but from experience, the 2.5 16v is poor.

Walk away from the porker!!!

but its a porsche!!!

lsa wrote:but its a porsche!!!

And?

lsa my dads had a few of these now there not to bad


just asked him, he managed to get a set of front disks and pads £70 from local auto spares

not sure on exhaust but there no flying machines there quite slow to be honest

lsa wrote:but its a porsche!!!

Right , Think with your head and not your heart.

If its that easy to get it through an MOT and back on the road for what ?
Screen 50
Fuel line .. 20-30 tops ?

Why the hell hasnt he done it and why does he want to swop for a fully working car ?
Oh yes .. I'll echo the above comments ... That engines rubbish.

And of course lets not forget what happens with old Porkers

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=BPuqHYjsBHw

the fuel lines are metal nearly all the way and a dealer only part for the right ones £300+ for them,and a nasty job depending where they are rotten.They may not be the fastest but they handle fantastically well,but need to be looked after.a car that age should not have a 16v engine fitted to it as standard either,should be an 8v.weak/noisy gearboxes are common,front ball joints and leaky oil seals on the front of the engine,also timing belts are expensive to replace,oh yeah water pump problems too.

TBH i wasnt even thinking with anything - i just fancied a porsche!

Went for a drive in the 220, burned off some tit in a BMW and felt a lot better. Ill never leave

That is a POOR mans porsche if it was a 928 then yes it would be worth a deal but that just walk away

didnt these have a VW van engine?

Dunno about a van but definitely VAG, Audi I think

924 had an audi engine,944 was a porsche engine,the poor mans porsche statement really pisses me off if it was not for these cars porsche would not exist as they do now and that is a FACT even 911 snobs will admit,and a 928 is a moneypit which is why very few old ones now exist as they are not financially viable to repair,one guy i knew a few years ago was quoted £1400 for a torque convertor .The 944 is a far superior handling car to any other porsche of its time with almost perfect 50-50 weight disrtibution and a good turbo version with a few tweaks would still embarass a lot of things on the road today.

I stand corrected regarding the VAG comment so

Many years ago I had the opportunity to "own" a -86 944 for about a week. I was not impressed in any way. It wasn't very fast and felt like a stiff compared to a Audi 200TQ or BMW 635.

And look at that interior. OMG. Who let the dog with dysentery in?

it would do against a 3.5 litre straight six or a turbo car putting out 220bhp but if you compare more evenly like the turbo version of the porsche (240bhp) is the only fair way to compare as what you said is like a honda-engined rover coupe is not as good as an m3

I still think it's not a car of the class it should be. For instance the indicator/washer stalks were the same as in my Passat from -79!

I remember very clearly that I was over-thrilled when I got the car. I was young, drove an old rust bucket Passat and got the opportunity to drive a fairly new Porsche. After a few days there was nothing! To quote BB King: The thrill is gone.

Sorry. Just my point of view.

The Audi was a 182bhp. Still a lot quicker than the over weight Porsche.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/1984-PORSCHE-944- ... dZViewItem

Looks familiar

the porsche would only be 167 bhp but the audi was turbo-charged it looks like a shed anyway.