Alfa Romeo Forum banner
1 - 20 of 36 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
I am currently in my second MGZS180.
I am considering a 159 3.2 Q4.

Has anyone done this?
How do they compare?
 

·
Registered
Alfa 159 2.0 JTDm Lusso 6sp.
Joined
·
8,389 Posts
Personally I cannot see why you are even mentioning the two in the same sentence. ....and not just because I'm an Alfa fan. Rovers are not nice to look at or, more importantly, be in ....the interiors are awful. They have not built a decent Rover since before the strike riddled British Leyland days. And as for using the MG tag on it...well Mr Morris (Morris Garages....MG) would be spinning in his grave to see his historic badge used on a warmed up shopping car for old folks!......and don't get me started on that Chinese crap with the same badge. Not a fan as you may have guessed by now! But since you already have one I'm guessing you may have a different view...lol! Like sitting Elle McPherson next to Susan Boyle .....which one do you want to be seen with?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,276 Posts
Personally I cannot see why you are even mentioning the two in the same sentence. ....and not just because I'm an Alfa fan. Rovers are not nice to look at or, more importantly, be in ....the interiors are awful. They have not built a decent Rover since before the strike riddled British Leyland days. And as for using the MG tag on it...well Mr Morris (Morris Garages....MG) would be spinning in his grave to see his historic badge used on a warmed up shopping car for old folks!......and don't get me started on that Chinese crap with the same badge. Not a fan as you may have guessed by now! But since you already have one I'm guessing you may have a different view...lol! Like sitting Elle McPherson next to Susan Boyle .....which one do you want to be seen with?
The pre 2004 (pre Project Drive) pre Facelift MGs & Rover have a decent interior and ride quality but I have to agree that the two cars are chalk and cheese. The only possible reason for not choosing a V6 Q4 159 (or Brera as I have) are the running costs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
138 Posts
Discussion Starter · #4 ·
Personally I cannot see why you are even mentioning the two in the same sentence.......
Thank you for your input but I guess you haven't actually driven a 180.

I was asking for real world comparisons from those who have.

The ZS's are the best cars I have ever owned in terms of handling and I don't want to end up driving around in a jelly when I could have spent less bringing my current car back up to scratch.
 

·
Registered
948 Spider LE
Joined
·
9,393 Posts
I am currently in my second MGZS180.
I am considering a 159 3.2 Q4.

Has anyone done this?
How do they compare?
99.99% certain nobody would have done this.
Different strokes for different folks...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,510 Posts
I'd say the MG ZT 260 - rear wheel drive 260bhp (V8 mustang engine) development by prodrive is more of a comparison to the 159 3.2 Q4 (V6 GM derived engine), but the MG that the OP mentioned is more value for money in terms of what you can pick them up for. Not what you get for your money though


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,276 Posts
Thank you for your input but I guess you haven't actually driven a 180.

I was asking for real world comparisons from those who have.

The ZS's are the best cars I have ever owned in terms of handling and I don't want to end up driving around in a jelly when I could have spent less bringing my current car back up to scratch.
The ZS certainly does handle well and is much more nimble than either a 159 or Brera so if these characteristics are important then you would be wise not to change.

As has been said, they are chalk and cheese so you should test drive a 159 and you will see what I mean.
Or think of a 159 as more akin to a MG ZT - a heavy, solid feeling GT* not a light, nimble GTI.

* like the 75/ZT and compared to the ZS, the 159 has a heavy clutch, gear change and steering but also a solid, well built, somewhat heavy feel on the road.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,510 Posts
Personally I cannot see why you are even mentioning the two in the same sentence. ....and not just because I'm an Alfa fan. Rovers are not nice to look at or, more importantly, be in ....the interiors are awful. They have not built a decent Rover since before the strike riddled British Leyland days. And as for using the MG tag on it...well Mr Morris (Morris Garages....MG) would be spinning in his grave to see his historic badge used on a warmed up shopping car for old folks!......and don't get me started on that Chinese crap with the same badge. Not a fan as you may have guessed by now! But since you already have one I'm guessing you may have a different view...lol! Like sitting Elle McPherson next to Susan Boyle .....which one do you want to be seen with?


Not sure, take a look at the MG SV - R. Just a pity after BMW sold it on they was strapped for cash. Those cars if they can be found are astronomically priced now


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,276 Posts
If you're happy with the Honda, why change? ;)
The Honda models were from a different era and I wish my Brera was as well built and as reliable as a Honda. Of course then it would be soul less and this quality in any car always seems to require deep pockets...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,003 Posts
MG all the way if you value handling and responsiveness

The 159, while attractive is a bit lardy to be a true competitor
Having worked in the motor trade many years its the lightweight cars i've driven that i remember the fondest
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,276 Posts
Didn't Honda confiscate all the tooling for the 45 before it got sold off to China?
You've missed out BMW's ownership and then the sale for £1 to the infamous 4 who devised the cost cutting project drive 'facelift' downgrading to boost their pension funds. (nothing escaped their attention, even the small badges on the c pillars were dropped, plus paper thin carpets, mat finish Fablon wood effect instead of the high gloss stuff etc etc.)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,276 Posts
A sad indictment of UK industrial "policy". :(
More of a cynical money grab by the four directors who had no intention of building the brand. Look at the assets lost over the years - Landrover, Range Rover, & Mini as well as the Triumph and MG brands. All now foreign owned as are most of our utility and telecoms companies but that's another story.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,510 Posts
The Honda models were from a different era and I wish my Brera was as well built and as reliable as a Honda. Of course then it would be soul less and this quality in any car always seems to require deep pockets...


The rover 45 had the same platform as the civic


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,510 Posts
Didn't Honda confiscate all the tooling for the 45 before it got sold off to China?


It's fact that five executives helped themselves to 42, million in pay & pensions as the company collapsed.
Honda never owned the company (iirc) they just did a joint venture in order to sell cars.

BMW bought all brand names from Maggie thatcher, then broke all the brand names up to sell to the highest bidder. MG - Rover was eventually sold to the Chinese and other brands on to ford, who then the sold it on to TATA ( Land Rover & Jaguar ) BMW just retains the Mini brand name


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Alfa 159 2.0 JTDm Lusso 6sp.
Joined
·
8,389 Posts
Thank you for your input but I guess you haven't actually driven a 180.

I was asking for real world comparisons from those who have.

The ZS's are the best cars I have ever owned in terms of handling and I don't want to end up driving around in a jelly when I could have spent less bringing my current car back up to scratch.
Fair enough....but I've driven many!!....I was a new and used car salesman for nearly 20 years! Yes the 159 will feel more jelly like (as you put it) compared to the MG. Its the more softly sprung and heavier. I bought the later, slightly lighter one with after market stiffer, lower suspension for that reason. But to two cars are so different that I cant imagine they have been compared too often.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
83 Posts
It's fact that five executives helped themselves to 42, million in pay & pensions as the company collapsed.
Honda never owned the company (iirc) they just did a joint venture in order to sell cars.

BMW bought all brand names from Maggie thatcher, then broke all the brand names up to sell to the highest bidder. MG - Rover was eventually sold to the Chinese and other brands on to ford, who then the sold it on to TATA ( Land Rover & Jaguar ) BMW just retains the Mini brand name


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The Rover name was separated from MG and was packaged with Land Rover so is now also in the hands of Tata
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,732 Posts
I would have thought that the 156 V6 would be more comparable to the MG. It is from the same era, has similar size and weight, plus a v6 2.5 engine.

If you search on the forum you will see the 156/159 differences have been discussed at length.

On the other hand, finding a decent 156 V6 is not easy these days, most have been neglected and/or rusted so need major restoration.
 
1 - 20 of 36 Posts
Top