You missed a lot for the 45. In 2002 it got flatter, cheaper seats, lost the door wood cappings, centre console wood varnish replaced with a cheaper variant, cheaper door handles that always break if pulled too hard or are frosty. Lucas remote fob replaced with the crappy Pektron in 2004(?). The facelifts for all 3 cars were worse in quality, notably the plastic 3d badges replaced by cheap paper stickers, bad quality headlight lenses that always go cloudy, and the 25 and 45s both got cheaper dashboards with air vents that always break.
Sadly in the way of sources there wasn’t much on the 45 I could find, it’ll be worth a revisit in its own full feature thanks for the comment I’ll pin this as it’s useful
Spot on. I used to drive a 54-plate (facelift) 45; the difference in quality compared to my then stepmum’s 1999 ‘T’ reg 416Si was remarkable. You would never believe the two vehicles were made by the same manufacturer. Don’t get me wrong - the 45 gave me 7 years’ worth of trouble-free motoring, but it lost that ‘sense of occasion’ found in the earlier 400 series.
It was penny pinching, literally. I have read from several sources MG Rover were well aware of the problems with the head gaskets (which also believe it or not were designed to be cheaper during the late 90s!) and could of rectified this on later models at a cost of something like 19 pence per car but chose to make 19 pence extra profit and keep churning them out. Land Rover and Lotus use the K series to this day and a modified version was used in the MG3 (1.5 N series?) without all the problems. Greed is what killed MG Rover
I worked at MGRover Longbridge for 9 years, subcontracted to transporter companies. My job was to independently check the cosmetic condition of the vehicle before releasing it for despatch. Any scratches, dents, obvious missing items like manuals were rectified or noted to facilitate later claims by showrooms. I worked in the MG building and noticed that first the two tone horn was replaced by a standard horn. Then the quality of the finish got a little worse. Boot liners developed bubbles, very noticeable. I was told the liners had been re-sourced and this was the new standard. Little things like this, all the time. I saw the 'Birmingham Screwdriver', literally a worker using a rubber mallet to 'adjust' a wing mirror. In the end MGRover was always doomed. It was no surprise when my redundancy notice arrived. I just felt sorry for my boss, also a victim of the collapse
Really great video. I have a 2001 rover 75 Connoisseur SE V6 in burgundy red metallic all the way from Australia. Mine was one of the last ones before project drive. It has almost 200,000 miles on it. I still drive it every day best car I have ever owned. She hasn’t put a foot wrong in the 20 years I’ve had her.
Great video Tom . I'm impressed with the effort you have put together in making this happen . I have owned one 75 tourer and two MG ZT's one of which I still own as she is a monogram one of only ten diesels that were built in its model and it is number 10 painted in Mirage. These are in my opinion the best engineered British car of its time and I am proud to own one and I am sure there are many that would agree . A true classic motor car .
It wasn’t just the cars, we had the ‘turnaround team’ who were there to reduce headcount. For example removing the door assistance so doors were removed by hand rather than an assisted jig that took the weight. I left in 2001 as jumping in and out of a car every 1 minute 25 seconds to fit a console starting at 7:55pm and finishing 6:55am was ridiculous, Didn’t need all of the cars, just wanted numbers and didn’t care about quality hence the place has been bulldozed…
Great video Tom, you’ve clearly spent a lot of time compiling it and it’s a good watch. I think most owners would agree that the cost cutting measures introduced here and there were a backward step and did little to enhance the company’s reputation, but as you say needs must when the devil drives, and if it kept MG Rover going for a little longer as a result that’s not a bad thing. Thankfully, most of the Project Drive deletions are easy to wind back once you know what they are. Thanks for the shout out BTW, my post on the Owners Club was, much like your videos, a labour of love to compile. Happy Rovering.
Longbridge had a 'soft landing' as a result of the Phoenix deal, while the leaseback arrangement, a purely financial deal for Phoenix, had the positive effect of providing a ready made springboard for St Modwen to regenerate the suburb and minimise the impact on South Birmingham. It was still traumatic for those affected, but if BMW had closed the plant years earlier, Birmingham City Council and the government wouldn't have been able to cushion the impact to the same extent. Everyone accepted for a decade or more that Longbridge was on borrowed time
Hello Tom! I'm Portuguese and I've been passionate about the Rover brand since I was a child. I'll try to leave a brief comment here and excuse any writing mistakes I may make, but my English is not the best. Many Rovers have passed through my hands. I currently own a Rover 200 Coupé (R8), a Rover 200 BRM and an MG ZS Mk2. In total I already had more than twelve Rovers, but at the moment I only have to keep these three. I have always been very interested and curious about the history of the automotive world, especially the history of Rover, which in my opinion is fascinating (it was). And the fact that I've had many Rovers (several models from different generations) and have always followed Rover's history a lot, I come to the conclusion that the project drive didn't just start from 2000 onwards, but right at the beginning of the 90s. Just look at a Rover 200/400 (R8) from the early years of manufacture (1989) and look at the latest Rover R8 from the last years of manufacture (1997/1998). There are many, or I would even say a lot of details and finishes that have been lost over the years, especially from 1992 to 1993. I could describe the various details here, but it would be an endless list. If we ride in a Rover R8 that was produced between 1989 and 1991/92 and then if we ride in a Rover R8 produced between 1993/94 it seems that we are in completely different cars. Not for the aesthetics itself, but for the comfort itself and the small details that were lost, but that made all the difference. So with this, and in my opinion, I think that all these cost containments only gave more strength to the press and ended up losing many fans of the brand and possible buyers. I am immensely sorry that the Rover brand has ended and that it has become part of history and the past, but perhaps it was preferable for the brand not to fall into ridicule and launch models like the City Rover, which in my opinion was a shot on the feet and that did not share at all the principles that Rover has always defended, as a car brand of class and prestige. Congratulations on the excellent video!
I sell Jeeps for a living and we had a similar cost reduction program that impacted decorative engine covers. I couldn't believe how many people were upset about this change, given how few people do their own maintenance nowadays. Great video!
Great video. I've been looking at the limited info on the 45 compared to the other two for some reason... Rover 45's had the rear anti-roll bar deleted around late 2003 and fitted with short rear springs to compensate. The PS reservoir lost its label around 2002. The plastic filler pipe cover went around 2002/2003 ish. The newer seat design was a 2003 change. Underbonnet insulation was only obtainable on MK2 saloon versions (why hatchback owners want the extra noise either is bewildering!). Carpets being changed mid 2002, sound deafening in doors gone and much thinner around footwell areas!
I’ve just picked up a facelift 75 connie se and I’m glad to say it’s had a lot of the nice bits added to it over the years. embossed headrests, real wood dash, proper c pillar badges etc
Great video, and the detail just right. I’ve always fancied a 75 but never took the plunge, I’ve an old mini and metro gta from late eighties to get my British fix! Such a shame the demise of Rover, I fully agree with your comments, keep it up great vid
Great vid as always, I think it was really the Phoenix Four and their shady business practices (i.e. stealing from MG Rover) that put the final nail in the coffin, but there were as everyone knows many reasons why they eventually went under. With Phoenix running the show I'm honestly surprised they lasted as long as they did.
The most shocking move was rebadging the atrocious Tata Indica as the CityRover. Then they had the audacity of slapping a Union Jack on the back and charging more than the amazing new Panda 😡
Interesting subject, I used to have a pre project drive R3 200 and now I drive a 2005 Rover Streetwise and by comparison the quality of fittings and finish feels cheaper than it did on the older cars. One thing extra to mention is the Rover name on the engine cam cover was deleted and it’s just a blank panel on the project drive cars. I can see why it was a necessary measure to save costs but the Phoenix 4 shot themselves in the foot as well by blowing a considerable amount of money on hospitality, events, parties etc plus pocketing profits for themselves and their Lifystyle’s when they should have been investing into their products!
Great level of detail Tom, whilst I can understand the cost pressures the combined affect eventually chips away at what the brand stands for. The 75 (pre Project Drive) are lovely cars with a brilliant sense of occasion way ahead of its contemporaries.
The Phoenix 4 killed Rover. Instead of getting a decent volume-seller in place they spent millions on the V8 engined 75 which had very limited appeal and low,sales volumes. The development costs would never have been recovered but it was a great ego trip for the 4 as they could then have reasonably decent company cars. A complete travesty and mis-use of corporate money
I had a Pre-Project Drive Rover 25 LI TD. It was an amazing car, Drove beautifully, really economical, and really quick. My uncle loved it so much he bought himself one. His was Post-Project Drive, it was never as good, still drove reasonably well but not as economical, was noisier on the motorway and just generally lacked a certain something we were never quite able to put our fingers on.
A few years ago I worked at ancillary manufacturer Lucas in Burnley, then owned by TRW. Basically this once huge factory was merely a design and logistics depot since car ancillary production had long since been moved to Slovakia, where wages were 1/6 of the labour cost in the UK. At that time, early noughties, they were well advanced in planning the move of production to Ukraine, where production costs would have been even less. This meant parts were being shipped all over Europe to various manufacturers - whilst creating a shrinking market because of job losses in Western Europe.
I agree - Project Drive was a necessary evil. An increase in profitability was needed and the alternative of an increase in purchase price would probably have done more harm to the bottom line than some tweaks reducing the cost of production.
My frist top class car Rover 216 B Reg 1984 , payed £ 1000, mum had a p reg 216, did over 100000 miles without a getting a new head gasket. Dad had a 1.8 Rover 75 , great days 😊❤
Rover died in 1994 when British aerospace off loaded Rover group to BMW. You cannot blame BMW for getting rid of Rover in a hurry after releasing the mistake they made. How towers and Co kept rovers workforce in a job for 5 years is a miracle.
I was transfixed watching that after briefly owning a Cowley built 75 V6 Connoisseur and now a 45 and TF. Project Drive didn't kill MG Rover, it was the last vestiges of an empire that had been on life support since British Leyland came into being. Couple of noticeable changes on TF is the loss of the chrome ashtray (a parts bin special from an XJS who's label still had the BL roundal on it!) and the fabric net on the engine side of the boot carpet. When you realise the way of upgrading an MG-Rover product is by getting parts off earlier models , I think that answers the question of why they eventually went out of business
Evening Tom , my 53 plate ZR has lost a few things in comparison to my old 52 plate main things are Cup holders and grab handles have gone. I looked at putting the latter back but holes aren't in shell of headlining. Lighter has also gone replaced with a blank plug . Previous owner has reinstated reinstated horns and colour coded interior trim
Thanks Tom - more of your excellent research and erudite presentation. I must say that removing the dual tone horns is the height of pettiness! And it must have been noticed…. Best wishes, John
I must admit, whilst I'm not a fan of Rovers, I do wish the company was still going. I can't help but feel that had bmw just persevered with the company, and perhaps replaced the 200 with a whole new supermini instead of making the 25; and helping Rover to develop the Mini replacement, then potentially, they might've been able to turn Rover into a mildly profitable company. I must admit, I do wonder that if they were still with us, how they would've dealt with the current craze of electrification. 🤔
Most car manufacturers improve products by upgrading or adding new features but MG Rover basically did the opposite and gradually removed features that made the cars look and feel special. The 75 was probably over engineered at launch but it was a very high quality product capable of competing with Jaguar, Mercedes etc. The removal of most features mentioned definitely made the car look and feel cheaper. A big one was the removal of real wood on the 75, this was one of Rover's USPs with virtually all models previously having some real walnut veneer. I have no doubt if MG Rover could get away with it they would have supplied cars with no wheels or engine to save money.
Nice work. Let me tell you that the assassination started much earlier and this was just one additional stroke. The brand image was suffering for years, thanks to abominations like the Maestro, Montego, Marina, Alegro, etc. Degrading the image even further is a plan that could provide only a couple of years of additional life. It should have been done exactly the opposite: Build quality and establish an image, to fight the competitors. The basic of the basics, never be cheap on the image. Most people buy dreams.
Some of things I’ve noticed on my 04 MK2 ZR compared to the MK1 ZS we had a few yrs ago is the carpet is a lot cheaper and more like felt, the MK2 air vents are crap and so flimsy that I swapped them out for Ford Fiesta MK6 ones, the glovebox is extremely thin and plastic-y and finally the lack of sound deadening is terrible. The roof sounds like a tin can when you knock on it same with the rear 1/4 panels. I’m gonna buy some sound deadening to install as that alone will make the car a much nicer place to be in. I’ve also already installed twin horns aswell as the std one was so wimpy 😂 I still love my MK2 though and its easy enough to add back a few ppd luxuries to make them what they should’ve been from the factory
Lovely Jubbly video as always. Project Nigel has a Rover 25 diesel project drive and what they did to that was pure evil, the dashboard looks like it came from China back then.
One thing I could never understand is why the side trims on the MGZT which is chrome on the Rover, is paint over chrome. Why did they pay to have them chromed. Surely the supplier could have sold them prior to the chroming process.
Removing the external bonnet release lever and the duel tone horns in favour of fumbling around to release bonnet and from quality car sounding horn to a 1970s mini were things I noticed first when I went from 51 plate v6 to 04 plate tdi,luckily as the v6 was getting scrapped and there was a week over lap I removed them to new car, along with rear number plate chrome(plastic)light ,I wish I'd kept the door trim surrounds with the felt also,I obtained a full size spare wheel to replace bicycle wheel that was supplied also
They removed most of what made the 75 a quality product. They did it to cut costs but in doing so they moved the car downmarket and made it less desirable so it’s no surprise the sales dipped
This is standard stuff unfortunately in OEM's on all mass market programmes, cost downs to reduce the BOM cost. In a cars life cycle there is definitely a sweet spot of cars to have, I have found it to be the cars just before a mid-cycle re-fresh, you miss all the initial issues from launch to 2yrs, but you also miss all the mid-cycle cost downs.
I’ve got 2 Rover 75 Contemporary SEs. One a 2004 and the other a 2005. The 2005 has many more optional extras than the Contemporary spec. But as both models have the same black sports seats and both very comfortable. The 2004 year the leather is of a better quality and thicker than the 2005.
The Cowley Oxford rover 75 was the best to own before they started stripping the 75 of its original values.they had the black sills which later became body coloured.from the 200 400 600 800 and 75 great cars I owned but quality let them down,still a shame the brand died like it did.more heart than the head purchases.
I'm pretty sure BMW had a hand in it. Rover had the UK company car market cornered and the "Bad Press" (probably purchased, as we now know what goes on in the media) was enough to shift the company car market from Rover to BMW. Sa far as killing the MGF - that Supersport 2000 model was a BMW killer for sure. One thing I did notice is that MG TF cars are much more prone to rust earlier than the MGF. We don't know what happened to the steel suppliers, someone who worked there might enlighten us, as it seems suspicious that TFs are more rust prone. Could also be the paint and coating suppliers. Maybe they cheaped out on the zinc? Anybody?
Cost cutting while necessary I do feel that there was no clear direction from the company to what it wanted, or any coherent plan for the future like replacing the aging 25 and 45, which were so far behind the competition 25 and 45 replacements they could of went to any number of companies and do a deal with them. Unfortunately making a new car from scratch is a very expensive process and rover wouldn’t of had the money to develop all new cars unless they done a deal with a manufacturer.
Owned 4 Rover 400 series cars in 90s 2000s all great cars Hondas influence helped the brand build quality was great such a shame the uk did not appreciate the cars value for money most of the cars i bought had been sent to Jersey and then back to uk (tax fiddle) .
Probably just a rebadging exercise really the issue is Rover wouldn’t have been allowed to compete at its full potential due to their connection with Jaguar
I got my 820 Vitesse with 65k on the clock just as Rover went bust . My elderly mother got an almost new 75 k series engine . She has now done 85k and has been through two new k series engines and the third is already loosing coolant . I drove it and thought how claustrophobic it was with heavy gearbox and clutch . and how much smaller it was than my 820 . My 820 has now done 400k miles and its on its original engine although the rear main seal went before xmas which cost £350 . My car feels the younger of the two , it drives a thousand times better . Its slim screen pillars and gorgeous interior make it in a different league than the cramped quaint old 75 . How can this be ? Maybe my 820 was mostly Japanese ?? maybe the Tomcat engine is far superior than the K series , maybe its just a better car ! Clarkson certainly thought so saying that the 75 was so old fashioned , that it ought to have had a thatched roof . says it all really . These days I blast down the M5 at erm the almost legal limit every weekend carrying all my boat gear in the cavernous hatchback , gas bottles tools , batteries etc and the 820 takes it all in its stride doing 35 mpg all day long . I took my mums 75 for a spin the other day and the headlining fell down . So I dont want to see any praise for the 75 cos the thing was bad from the start ....and that notorious k series engine ...oh mamma !
I think most of the changes were fairly clever. New car buyers are often blown away by the two numbers on the number plate than the fact that they need to drive a number of miles to get anything from the heater. Other manufacturers drop things as well as the model matures. Once a model or new shape car is out the press are unlucky to review it again so things can be removed. They went too far with the wheel arch liners that did them harm in my opinion. However the badges made it look a little more modern. Personally I perfer the pre facelift car as I do with most cars.
Ah, Value Engineering - a hateful couple of words. It implies that the intrinsic characteristics that make something worth investing in have been refined, reviewed and made efficient. In the real world it means ‘cheapen, de-content, standardise’ - you could probably get away with it on a 25 or 45, but the 75 should have remained a car which possessed a palate of great quality materials - the ‘plood’ was a step too far for me!
Not sure all that of cost cutting was necessary especially when you consider the money wasted on development of the ZT V8 and the oh so wasteful MG SV including the purchase of the rights to the Mangusta. Both potentially great cars but when replacements were needed in their product range, it stands out as terrible mismanagement, wasted opportunities, and wasted crucial money that could have kept them going for longer and/or maybe a joint venture or proper buyout rather than a liquidation sale.
Had three 75's in period imagine my surprise when going to replace a tail light bulb they had done away with the plastic cover over the rear lights in the boot lol, They were shocking the later cars if you had owned earlier examples.
But £100,000 in savings is wiped out by just three lost sales if it turns someone off and brand loyalty was something you should never sabotage. The £15 Korean head unit (as fitted in the 25) in the £76,000 SV was one example, better not to fit one at all! 😎😇
All this cost cutting and yet the Phoenix 4 still kept taking more money for their golden parachute retirement plans. I think it was P4's greed that killed MG Rover tbh.
to me they were ok to run full project drive on the 45 and 25, however they should have been a lot more careful with the 75. the 75 was the flag ship, and needed to air a statement of quality, as such going as far as they did cheapened the brand, and stopped people veiwing it as a luxary brand. they shouldnt have been splashing the money on racing, partys and supper cars but using every penny they had to get a 45 replacement, and that would once again need to air quality and luxary. then finally they should have used every penny that they could to replace the 25, by this time rover would be airing quality and production costs would be lowering as they wouldnt be paying licensing, this would hopfully mean more profit any way to replace the 25, get somthing onto the market once again it would need to go up market and air quality and luxary. once that was relased, may be run a few years and give the 75 a facelift, then follow that up with a e class 5 series competitor. face lift the new 45 and 25 and then finally look at a new 75 replacement, once the money really started to flow look at taking on the s-class. I still think there is room for rover to return, everything has gone too sporty, people have forgotten what a good riding car is, i was shocked when the misses got her first car a few months back (a 75 tourer), and now prefer the ride and handling to my 09 plate 535d
Messing around doing this to save a few quid on each car, while burning money with indecisive stupidity during design work for new cars, and ridiculous vanity projects like the SV. Some of the things tehy did are things nobody would notice or care about but the perceived quality of the interior isn't a place to try and save money if you want to keep the list price up. Badge deleting is fine, nobody really notices that, but they still managed to do that wrong by changing things instead of simply removing them; leave rover embossed on the rear numberplate surround and take the viking badge off, instead they spent money making new mouldings.
While this cheapening of the products is terrible, it did not kill MG Rover. The company was doomed already with the formation of BL in the 60’s. Brilliant engineering,absolutely inept management, horrible build quality, money was spent on all the wrong things, endless strikes…
Even if MG ROVER had survived, they wouldn't be manufactured in this country. Just like all the other car makers, they have had to move production to cheap labour countries. The talks with China, that went so wrong would I'm sure taken production overseas. Its just the way it is. Is a BMW made in Germany? No, is my wife's Citroen from France? No.
@tomdrives unfortunately, a lot of it is our fault. We all want to buy the cheapest. Just look at the amount of rubbish pattern car parts there are now. As a fellow 75 owner, you will know only too well. Need I even mention drop links lol. Thing is, people buy a pair off ebay for a tenner and expect them to be good.
Rover 75 is to this day the worst car I have ever driven. It had this weird oversized center consol that pushed my leg into an almost painful position.. I only drove it from Glasgow to Liverpool and back and swore I would never own one again. 🤣
![ละลาย (LALALYE) - DAOU PITTAYA ต้าห์อู๋ พิทยา [OFFICIAL MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wo6r9TgausI/mqdefault.jpg)
You missed a lot for the 45. In 2002 it got flatter, cheaper seats, lost the door wood cappings, centre console wood varnish replaced with a cheaper variant, cheaper door handles that always break if pulled too hard or are frosty. Lucas remote fob replaced with the crappy Pektron in 2004(?). The facelifts for all 3 cars were worse in quality, notably the plastic 3d badges replaced by cheap paper stickers, bad quality headlight lenses that always go cloudy, and the 25 and 45s both got cheaper dashboards with air vents that always break.
Sadly in the way of sources there wasn’t much on the 45 I could find, it’ll be worth a revisit in its own full feature thanks for the comment I’ll pin this as it’s useful
@@tomdriveswould love to see more on the 45 if you can find any information on it great videos by the way 👍
Spot on. I used to drive a 54-plate (facelift) 45; the difference in quality compared to my then stepmum’s 1999 ‘T’ reg 416Si was remarkable. You would never believe the two vehicles were made by the same manufacturer.
Don’t get me wrong - the 45 gave me 7 years’ worth of trouble-free motoring, but it lost that ‘sense of occasion’ found in the earlier 400 series.
Perhaps not everything was changed under the guise of project ‘Drive’ and changed under the guise of a MY change / update?
It was penny pinching, literally. I have read from several sources MG Rover were well aware of the problems with the head gaskets (which also believe it or not were designed to be cheaper during the late 90s!) and could of rectified this on later models at a cost of something like 19 pence per car but chose to make 19 pence extra profit and keep churning them out. Land Rover and Lotus use the K series to this day and a modified version was used in the MG3 (1.5 N series?) without all the problems. Greed is what killed MG Rover
I worked at MGRover Longbridge for 9 years, subcontracted to transporter companies. My job was to independently check the cosmetic condition of the vehicle before releasing it for despatch. Any scratches, dents, obvious missing items like manuals were rectified or noted to facilitate later claims by showrooms.
I worked in the MG building and noticed that first the two tone horn was replaced by a standard horn. Then the quality of the finish got a little worse. Boot liners developed bubbles, very noticeable. I was told the liners had been re-sourced and this was the new standard.
Little things like this, all the time. I saw the 'Birmingham Screwdriver', literally a worker using a rubber mallet to 'adjust' a wing mirror.
In the end MGRover was always doomed.
It was no surprise when my redundancy notice arrived. I just felt sorry for my boss, also a victim of the collapse
Really great video. I have a 2001 rover 75 Connoisseur SE V6 in burgundy red metallic all the way from Australia.
Mine was one of the last ones before project drive. It has almost 200,000 miles on it. I still drive it every day best car I have ever owned. She hasn’t put a foot wrong in the 20 years I’ve had her.
Great video Tom . I'm impressed with the effort you have put together in making this happen .
I have owned one 75 tourer and two MG ZT's one of which I still own as she is a monogram one of only ten diesels that were built in its model and it is number 10 painted in Mirage.
These are in my opinion the best engineered British car of its time and I am proud to own one and I am sure there are many that would agree . A true classic motor car .
It wasn’t just the cars, we had the ‘turnaround team’ who were there to reduce headcount. For example removing the door assistance so doors were removed by hand rather than an assisted jig that took the weight. I left in 2001 as jumping in and out of a car every 1 minute 25 seconds to fit a console starting at 7:55pm and finishing 6:55am was ridiculous, Didn’t need all of the cars, just wanted numbers and didn’t care about quality hence the place has been bulldozed…
Thanks for the comment Glen, it’s insights like this that help teach the real story I never knew that.
Great video Tom, you’ve clearly spent a lot of time compiling it and it’s a good watch.
I think most owners would agree that the cost cutting measures introduced here and there were a backward step and did little to enhance the company’s reputation, but as you say needs must when the devil drives, and if it kept MG Rover going for a little longer as a result that’s not a bad thing.
Thankfully, most of the Project Drive deletions are easy to wind back once you know what they are. Thanks for the shout out BTW, my post on the Owners Club was, much like your videos, a labour of love to compile. Happy Rovering.
Thanks Reebs great to hear you’ve watched this especially after I’ve read your post more times then I remember for the last 7+ years!
Longbridge had a 'soft landing' as a result of the Phoenix deal, while the leaseback arrangement, a purely financial deal for Phoenix, had the positive effect of providing a ready made springboard for St Modwen to regenerate the suburb and minimise the impact on South Birmingham.
It was still traumatic for those affected, but if BMW had closed the plant years earlier, Birmingham City Council and the government wouldn't have been able to cushion the impact to the same extent.
Everyone accepted for a decade or more that Longbridge was on borrowed time
Excellent video Tom. Good info given. Personally pre and post project Rover the cars were effin good cars. I loved my 53 plate MG ZT diesel.
Thanks! I like both loved the 53 plate ZT I drove as well
Hello Tom!
I'm Portuguese and I've been passionate about the Rover brand since I was a child.
I'll try to leave a brief comment here and excuse any writing mistakes I may make, but my English is not the best.
Many Rovers have passed through my hands. I currently own a Rover 200 Coupé (R8), a Rover 200 BRM and an MG ZS Mk2.
In total I already had more than twelve Rovers, but at the moment I only have to keep these three.
I have always been very interested and curious about the history of the automotive world, especially the history of Rover, which in my opinion is fascinating (it was).
And the fact that I've had many Rovers (several models from different generations) and have always followed Rover's history a lot, I come to the conclusion that the project drive didn't just start from 2000 onwards, but right at the beginning of the 90s.
Just look at a Rover 200/400 (R8) from the early years of manufacture (1989) and look at the latest Rover R8 from the last years of manufacture (1997/1998).
There are many, or I would even say a lot of details and finishes that have been lost over the years, especially from 1992 to 1993. I could describe the various details here, but it would be an endless list.
If we ride in a Rover R8 that was produced between 1989 and 1991/92 and then if we ride in a Rover R8 produced between 1993/94 it seems that we are in completely different cars. Not for the aesthetics itself, but for the comfort itself and the small details that were lost, but that made all the difference.
So with this, and in my opinion, I think that all these cost containments only gave more strength to the press and ended up losing many fans of the brand and possible buyers.
I am immensely sorry that the Rover brand has ended and that it has become part of history and the past, but perhaps it was preferable for the brand not to fall into ridicule and launch models like the City Rover, which in my opinion was a shot on the feet and that did not share at all the principles that Rover has always defended, as a car brand of class and prestige.
Congratulations on the excellent video!
I sell Jeeps for a living and we had a similar cost reduction program that impacted decorative engine covers. I couldn't believe how many people were upset about this change, given how few people do their own maintenance nowadays. Great video!
Great video. I've been looking at the limited info on the 45 compared to the other two for some reason... Rover 45's had the rear anti-roll bar deleted around late 2003 and fitted with short rear springs to compensate. The PS reservoir lost its label around 2002. The plastic filler pipe cover went around 2002/2003 ish. The newer seat design was a 2003 change. Underbonnet insulation was only obtainable on MK2 saloon versions (why hatchback owners want the extra noise either is bewildering!). Carpets being changed mid 2002, sound deafening in doors gone and much thinner around footwell areas!
Thank you for supporting vintage Rovers.
My pleasure!
Always be a Rover car in my heart.
Even tho I now drive a vauxhall zafira design desil
I’ve just picked up a facelift 75 connie se and I’m glad to say it’s had a lot of the nice bits added to it over the years. embossed headrests, real wood dash, proper c pillar badges etc
Great video, and the detail just right. I’ve always fancied a 75 but never took the plunge, I’ve an old mini and metro gta from late eighties to get my British fix! Such a shame the demise of Rover, I fully agree with your comments, keep it up great vid
Great vid as always, I think it was really the Phoenix Four and their shady business practices (i.e. stealing from MG Rover) that put the final nail in the coffin, but there were as everyone knows many reasons why they eventually went under. With Phoenix running the show I'm honestly surprised they lasted as long as they did.
The most shocking move was rebadging the atrocious Tata Indica as the CityRover. Then they had the audacity of slapping a Union Jack on the back and charging more than the amazing new Panda 😡
Amazing … panda ?
@@pug2052 European Car of the Year 2004.....
@@sbomorse so is the Dacia these days but that’s not saying much ….
@@pug2052 something the Peugeot 205 was never awarded, beaten in its year by the Fiat Uno...
@@sbomorse shadowed by the 1.9 gti…..
Interesting subject, I used to have a pre project drive R3 200 and now I drive a 2005 Rover Streetwise and by comparison the quality of fittings and finish feels cheaper than it did on the older cars.
One thing extra to mention is the Rover name on the engine cam cover was deleted and it’s just a blank panel on the project drive cars.
I can see why it was a necessary measure to save costs but the Phoenix 4 shot themselves in the foot as well by blowing a considerable amount of money on hospitality, events, parties etc plus pocketing profits for themselves and their Lifystyle’s when they should have been investing into their products!
Brilliant video again Tom with great content for owners
Thanks Glen, appreciate you as always
The moral of the story: buy the earliest, highest specced 75 you can find.
Great level of detail Tom, whilst I can understand the cost pressures the combined affect eventually chips away at what the brand stands for. The 75 (pre Project Drive) are lovely cars with a brilliant sense of occasion way ahead of its contemporaries.
Thanks! And yes that’s the challenge they faced and all car companies face sadly though MG Rover had more urgency due to the funding issues.
Wow - so many good videos one after the other!! awesome stuff!!
The Phoenix 4 killed Rover. Instead of getting a decent volume-seller in place they spent millions on the V8 engined 75 which had very limited appeal and low,sales volumes. The development costs would never have been recovered but it was a great ego trip for the 4 as they could then have reasonably decent company cars. A complete travesty and mis-use of corporate money
Always wondered if they wouldn’t have been better off stopping making the 45 and paying the Honda tax rather than project drive. Shame, I miss rover
From Spain and as an 2’Rovers owner… I say that It was an real pity….. keep your rovers always mate
I drive a vauxhall zafira Design 7 seater...but my heart is always be with the Rover 45 and 75 ...
Well done mate 👏
I had a Pre-Project Drive Rover 25 LI TD. It was an amazing car, Drove beautifully, really economical, and really quick. My uncle loved it so much he bought himself one. His was Post-Project Drive, it was never as good, still drove reasonably well but not as economical, was noisier on the motorway and just generally lacked a certain something we were never quite able to put our fingers on.
A few years ago I worked at ancillary manufacturer Lucas in Burnley, then owned by TRW. Basically this once huge factory was merely a design and logistics depot since car ancillary production had long since been moved to Slovakia, where wages were 1/6 of the labour cost in the UK. At that time, early noughties, they were well advanced in planning the move of production to Ukraine, where production costs would have been even less. This meant parts were being shipped all over Europe to various manufacturers - whilst creating a shrinking market because of job losses in Western Europe.
I agree - Project Drive was a necessary evil. An increase in profitability was needed and the alternative of an increase in purchase price would probably have done more harm to the bottom line than some tweaks reducing the cost of production.
My frist top class car Rover 216 B Reg 1984 , payed £ 1000, mum had a p reg 216, did over 100000 miles without a getting a new head gasket. Dad had a 1.8 Rover 75 , great days 😊❤
Great video Tom.
Rover died in 1994 when British aerospace off loaded Rover group to BMW.
You cannot blame BMW for getting rid of Rover in a hurry after releasing the mistake they made.
How towers and Co kept rovers workforce in a job for 5 years is a miracle.
I was transfixed watching that after briefly owning a Cowley built 75 V6 Connoisseur and now a 45 and TF.
Project Drive didn't kill MG Rover, it was the last vestiges of an empire that had been on life support since British Leyland came into being.
Couple of noticeable changes on TF is the loss of the chrome ashtray (a parts bin special from an XJS who's label still had the BL roundal on it!) and the fabric net on the engine side of the boot carpet.
When you realise the way of upgrading an MG-Rover product is by getting parts off earlier models , I think that answers the question of why they eventually went out of business
Evening Tom , my 53 plate ZR has lost a few things in comparison to my old 52 plate main things are Cup holders and grab handles have gone. I looked at putting the latter back but holes aren't in shell of headlining. Lighter has also gone replaced with a blank plug . Previous owner has reinstated reinstated horns and colour coded interior trim
Thanks Tom - more of your excellent research and erudite presentation.
I must say that removing the dual tone horns is the height of pettiness! And it must have been noticed….
Best wishes, John
I must admit, whilst I'm not a fan of Rovers, I do wish the company was still going. I can't help but feel that had bmw just persevered with the company, and perhaps replaced the 200 with a whole new supermini instead of making the 25; and helping Rover to develop the Mini replacement, then potentially, they might've been able to turn Rover into a mildly profitable company.
I must admit, I do wonder that if they were still with us, how they would've dealt with the current craze of electrification. 🤔
Most car manufacturers improve products by upgrading or adding new features but MG Rover basically did the opposite and gradually removed features that made the cars look and feel special. The 75 was probably over engineered at launch but it was a very high quality product capable of competing with Jaguar, Mercedes etc. The removal of most features mentioned definitely made the car look and feel cheaper. A big one was the removal of real wood on the 75, this was one of Rover's USPs with virtually all models previously having some real walnut veneer. I have no doubt if MG Rover could get away with it they would have supplied cars with no wheels or engine to save money.
Nice work. Let me tell you that the assassination started much earlier and this was just one additional stroke. The brand image was suffering for years, thanks to abominations like the Maestro, Montego, Marina, Alegro, etc. Degrading the image even further is a plan that could provide only a couple of years of additional life. It should have been done exactly the opposite: Build quality and establish an image, to fight the competitors. The basic of the basics, never be cheap on the image. Most people buy dreams.
Some of things I’ve noticed on my 04 MK2 ZR compared to the MK1 ZS we had a few yrs ago is the carpet is a lot cheaper and more like felt, the MK2 air vents are crap and so flimsy that I swapped them out for Ford Fiesta MK6 ones, the glovebox is extremely thin and plastic-y and finally the lack of sound deadening is terrible. The roof sounds like a tin can when you knock on it same with the rear 1/4 panels.
I’m gonna buy some sound deadening to install as that alone will make the car a much nicer place to be in. I’ve also already installed twin horns aswell as the std one was so wimpy 😂 I still love my MK2 though and its easy enough to add back a few ppd luxuries to make them what they should’ve been from the factory
Was the air vents easy to fit?
Lovely Jubbly video as always. Project Nigel has a Rover 25 diesel project drive and what they did to that was pure evil, the dashboard looks like it came from China back then.
One thing I could never understand is why the side trims on the MGZT which is chrome on the Rover, is paint over chrome. Why did they pay to have them chromed. Surely the supplier could have sold them prior to the chroming process.
Very comprehensive.
Removing the external bonnet release lever and the duel tone horns in favour of fumbling around to release bonnet and from quality car sounding horn to a 1970s mini were things I noticed first when I went from 51 plate v6 to 04 plate tdi,luckily as the v6 was getting scrapped and there was a week over lap I removed them to new car, along with rear number plate chrome(plastic)light ,I wish I'd kept the door trim surrounds with the felt also,I obtained a full size spare wheel to replace bicycle wheel that was supplied also
They removed most of what made the 75 a quality product. They did it to cut costs but in doing so they moved the car downmarket and made it less desirable so it’s no surprise the sales dipped
This is standard stuff unfortunately in OEM's on all mass market programmes, cost downs to reduce the BOM cost. In a cars life cycle there is definitely a sweet spot of cars to have, I have found it to be the cars just before a mid-cycle re-fresh, you miss all the initial issues from launch to 2yrs, but you also miss all the mid-cycle cost downs.
I’ve got 2 Rover 75 Contemporary SEs. One a 2004 and the other a 2005. The 2005 has many more optional extras than the Contemporary spec. But as both models have the same black sports seats and both very comfortable. The 2004 year the leather is of a better quality and thicker than the 2005.
The Cowley Oxford rover 75 was the best to own before they started stripping the 75 of its original values.they had the black sills which later became body coloured.from the 200 400 600 800 and 75 great cars I owned but quality let them down,still a shame the brand died like it did.more heart than the head purchases.
I'm pretty sure BMW had a hand in it. Rover had the UK company car market cornered and the "Bad Press" (probably purchased, as we now know what goes on in the media) was enough to shift the company car market from Rover to BMW. Sa far as killing the MGF - that Supersport 2000 model was a BMW killer for sure.
One thing I did notice is that MG TF cars are much more prone to rust earlier than the MGF. We don't know what happened to the steel suppliers, someone who worked there might enlighten us, as it seems suspicious that TFs are more rust prone. Could also be the paint and coating suppliers. Maybe they cheaped out on the zinc? Anybody?
I had a 45 for about 6 months. It wasn't bad but the k series engine made it just a temporary fix.
Cost cutting while necessary I do feel that there was no clear direction from the company to what it wanted, or any coherent plan for the future like replacing the aging 25 and 45, which were so far behind the competition 25 and 45 replacements they could of went to any number of companies and do a deal with them. Unfortunately making a new car from scratch is a very expensive process and rover wouldn’t of had the money to develop all new cars unless they done a deal with a manufacturer.
Owned 4 Rover 400 series cars in 90s 2000s all great cars Hondas influence helped the brand build quality was great such a shame the uk did not appreciate the cars value for money most of the cars i bought had been sent to Jersey and then back to uk (tax fiddle) .
What do you think Tata would've done with Rover when they acquired the rights in 2008???
Probably just a rebadging exercise really the issue is Rover wouldn’t have been allowed to compete at its full potential due to their connection with Jaguar
@@tomdrives I'd love to share my ideas for what Rover would've done with a proper management team, etc.
More chrome, shiny black leather and clad in travertine 😂
I got my 820 Vitesse with 65k on the clock just as Rover went bust . My elderly mother got an almost new 75 k series engine . She has now done 85k and has been through two new k series engines and the third is already loosing coolant . I drove it and thought how claustrophobic it was with heavy gearbox and clutch . and how much smaller it was than my 820 . My 820 has now done 400k miles and its on its original engine although the rear main seal went before xmas which cost £350 . My car feels the younger of the two , it drives a thousand times better . Its slim screen pillars and gorgeous interior make it in a different league than the cramped quaint old 75 . How can this be ? Maybe my 820 was mostly Japanese ?? maybe the Tomcat engine is far superior than the K series , maybe its just a better car ! Clarkson certainly thought so saying that the 75 was so old fashioned , that it ought to have had a thatched roof . says it all really . These days I blast down the M5 at erm the almost legal limit every weekend carrying all my boat gear in the cavernous hatchback , gas bottles tools , batteries etc and the 820 takes it all in its stride doing 35 mpg all day long . I took my mums 75 for a spin the other day and the headlining fell down . So I dont want to see any praise for the 75 cos the thing was bad from the start ....and that notorious k series engine ...oh mamma !
I think most of the changes were fairly clever. New car buyers are often blown away by the two numbers on the number plate than the fact that they need to drive a number of miles to get anything from the heater.
Other manufacturers drop things as well as the model matures. Once a model or new shape car is out the press are unlucky to review it again so things can be removed.
They went too far with the wheel arch liners that did them harm in my opinion. However the badges made it look a little more modern. Personally I perfer the pre facelift car as I do with most cars.
Yes this killed the British car industry.
Cost cutting absolutely decimated rover & led to its demise.
Ah, Value Engineering - a hateful couple of words. It implies that the intrinsic characteristics that make something worth investing in have been refined, reviewed and made efficient. In the real world it means ‘cheapen, de-content, standardise’ - you could probably get away with it on a 25 or 45, but the 75 should have remained a car which possessed a palate of great quality materials - the ‘plood’ was a step too far for me!
or "Valueless Engineering" !
Not sure all that of cost cutting was necessary especially when you consider the money wasted on development of the ZT V8 and the oh so wasteful MG SV including the purchase of the rights to the Mangusta. Both potentially great cars but when replacements were needed in their product range, it stands out as terrible mismanagement, wasted opportunities, and wasted crucial money that could have kept them going for longer and/or maybe a joint venture or proper buyout rather than a liquidation sale.
Had three 75's in period imagine my surprise when going to replace a tail light bulb they had done away with the plastic cover over the rear lights in the boot lol, They were shocking the later cars if you had owned earlier examples.
But £100,000 in savings is wiped out by just three lost sales if it turns someone off and brand loyalty was something you should never sabotage. The £15 Korean head unit (as fitted in the 25) in the £76,000 SV was one example, better not to fit one at all!
😎😇
All this cost cutting and yet the Phoenix 4 still kept taking more money for their golden parachute retirement plans. I think it was P4's greed that killed MG Rover tbh.
to me they were ok to run full project drive on the 45 and 25, however they should have been a lot more careful with the 75. the 75 was the flag ship, and needed to air a statement of quality, as such going as far as they did cheapened the brand, and stopped people veiwing it as a luxary brand. they shouldnt have been splashing the money on racing, partys and supper cars but using every penny they had to get a 45 replacement, and that would once again need to air quality and luxary. then finally they should have used every penny that they could to replace the 25, by this time rover would be airing quality and production costs would be lowering as they wouldnt be paying licensing, this would hopfully mean more profit any way to replace the 25, get somthing onto the market once again it would need to go up market and air quality and luxary. once that was relased, may be run a few years and give the 75 a facelift, then follow that up with a e class 5 series competitor. face lift the new 45 and 25 and then finally look at a new 75 replacement, once the money really started to flow look at taking on the s-class. I still think there is room for rover to return, everything has gone too sporty, people have forgotten what a good riding car is, i was shocked when the misses got her first car a few months back (a 75 tourer), and now prefer the ride and handling to my 09 plate 535d
Big dufference on that wood. I dont think had i been in charge i wouldve allowed that one. I probably wouldve took the engine out first!
Well in 2005 leatherette folder was back with the new rover badging
I’ve never seen that, do you have a photo?
suppose to too little too late but great review
I don’t think there was much they could’ve done they only postponed the inevitable without significant investment
All these changes did was drag out the inevitable. Imho. How much did the big boys cut from their wages/bonus's?
Was a tragedy
Where did you get that shirt?
Depop, it was a MGR work shirt new old stock.
Messing around doing this to save a few quid on each car, while burning money with indecisive stupidity during design work for new cars, and ridiculous vanity projects like the SV.
Some of the things tehy did are things nobody would notice or care about but the perceived quality of the interior isn't a place to try and save money if you want to keep the list price up. Badge deleting is fine, nobody really notices that, but they still managed to do that wrong by changing things instead of simply removing them; leave rover embossed on the rear numberplate surround and take the viking badge off, instead they spent money making new mouldings.
Top gear's reviews didn't help either
While this cheapening of the products is terrible, it did not kill MG Rover. The company was doomed already with the formation of BL in the 60’s. Brilliant engineering,absolutely inept management, horrible build quality, money was spent on all the wrong things, endless strikes…
It made BMW as they stole the blueprints. Sod it +++
Told ya!
Did this really help the company? I doubt it.
It seems like the cars were made worse but it hardly saved any money. Pointless overall.
Totally usual things in the worldwide car industry. Nothing special to MG Rover at all.
Strip a car from its most important sellingpoint , its INTERIOR ........and be surprised nobody wants them no more ! 😂😂😂😂😂
Even if MG ROVER had survived, they wouldn't be manufactured in this country. Just like all the other car makers, they have had to move production to cheap labour countries. The talks with China, that went so wrong would I'm sure taken production overseas. Its just the way it is. Is a BMW made in Germany? No, is my wife's Citroen from France? No.
It’s quite sad isn’t it. It’s also quite odd all Fiats are made in Poland also
@tomdrives unfortunately, a lot of it is our fault. We all want to buy the cheapest. Just look at the amount of rubbish pattern car parts there are now. As a fellow 75 owner, you will know only too well. Need I even mention drop links lol. Thing is, people buy a pair off ebay for a tenner and expect them to be good.
It’s only what car manufactures are doing now and calling it weight saving for emissions
Rover 75 is to this day the worst car I have ever driven. It had this weird oversized center consol that pushed my leg into an almost painful position.. I only drove it from Glasgow to Liverpool and back and swore I would never own one again. 🤣
Project Drive, eh. *Hell's TEETH!*