automatic choice - performance from 2000 automatic

[gary smith]

A friend of mine has been offered a 2000 automatic at a reasonable price,the car is a series 2 and low mileage,it is in immaculate condition including the base unit (never welded)The only thing bothering him having driven the car is the lack of performance and heavy fuel consumption.Other than fitting a manual box which he doesnt want to do, does anyone know of any way the performance can be bettered.This car will be an everyday car not just driven to shows etc.regards gary.

 

[Gary]

I had the use of a SI 2000SC auto a couple of years ago - it was great fun and I was almost tempted to buy it (in exchange for a V8!) The lack of performance did not bother me and in city traffic the car had no problem whatsoever.

Don't forget these were fast cars when new and still quick when compare with a lot of mundane euro boxes.

I also had a P4 105R - which was the automatic, everyone advised against it, but it was the smoothest car I have ever driven, the Roverdrive transmission has to be experienced! The car was more than capable of keeping up with modern traffic and once you have reached cruising speed it doesn't matter how you got there!

Good luck

Gary

 

[webmaster]

I think he would be better off with a 2200, the 2000 auto's were never particularly fast, ask the editor he had one for a few years.

A 2200TC is a reasonably rapid car, although I would suggest a SC as the TC's go out of tune frequently. (I've had one for 10 years, but manual)

Richard

 

[NickDunning]

A friend of mine has been offered a 2000 automatic at a reasonable price,the car is a series 2 and low mileage,it is in immaculate condition including the base unit (never welded)The only thing bothering him having driven the car is the lack of performance and heavy fuel consumption.Other than fitting a manual box which he doesnt want to do, does anyone know of any way the performance can be bettered.This car will be an everyday car not just driven to shows etc.regards gary.

I've run a 1972 2000 auto for several years. Firstly lack of performance is a problem if you're looking at doing a lot of distance - these cars are not really suited for the motorway. Mine will sit at 65-70mph all day but as a package they are not really suited to modern traffic conditions, accelaration is none-existent. Around town however I cannot think of a nicer vehicle to have. Smooth, quiet and stress free. I've always got about 21-23mpg urban and approx 26-28mpg. The autobox, despite being the achilles heel of the car, is very smooth and quiet, which makes it more refined than a manual 2000SC.

The 2000 auto was only introduced by Rover after considerable customer demand for a more 'traditional' gentleman's carriage version of the P6. Reviews at the time stated the power band from the OHC engine was not ideal for an autobox and thus it turned out. In the 21st century it's a rare car.

At Blenheim Palace in July there were a grand total of three out of the 150-160 cars there. I suspect there only around 100 or so left on the roads. A lot of good cars were broken up for interiors/panels etc. for V8's.

Cheers
Nick

 

[JohnGlinn(Cardiff)]

Gary (Smith),
I agree with Nick but will add my sixpen'orth. Price and condition - If it's a good price, looks superb and runs well then buy it. Slightly heavier fuel consumption can be offset by cheap insurance and free tax (if it was BUILT before the end of 1972). It will not have the ultimate performance of most modern cars but should keep up with the flow of traffic and he will be very comfortable and less stressed as compensation. He shouldn't imagine that he will be treated any differently by modern traffic - he will still be cut up and pulled out upon!
Regards, John.

 

[Mike Griffiths]

Hello All

I had a 2.2sc Auto, which was a really nice driver about town, but as stated previously was a bit underpowered for auto transmission on motorways. Another problem encountered was the flex plate cracking (twice in two years), normally caused by crank end float, but mine as I found out second time around was the spigot on the torque converter being slightly out of true. Have now got a manual V8, but wished I had an auto, as the clutch is very heavy, and can be a pain getting in and out of gear when started.

Regards

Mike

 

[NickDunning]

Hello All

I had a 2.2sc Auto, which was a really nice driver about town, but as stated previously was a bit underpowered for auto transmission on motorways. Another problem encountered was the flex plate cracking (twice in two years), normally caused by crank end float, but mine as I found out second time around was the spigot on the torque converter being slightly out of true.

The problem with the flexi plate is, I believe, unique to the 2200 auto?? I don't understand the whys and wherefores but it doesn't appear to affect the (earlier) 2000 auto.

Another plus point of the 2000 auto is that it is extremely easy to drive. My wife finds my 2000SC (manual) very difficult to drive but has no problem with the Auto at all. And no 'fizzing' gearstick...

Cheers
Nick