The Rover 75 Story

So, we’ve covered the Rover SD1 and its replacement, the Rover 800. Now we come to the last large Rover, the 75. It’s a shame that this was probably the best quality car Rover ever made, but maybe the least popular. But Rover was like a cat on its 9th life, and there’s only so many opportunities you get before it’s game over.

Episode Transcript

(00:03):
So, we’ve covered the Rover SD1 and itsreplacement, the Rover 800.
Now we come to the last large Rover, the 75.
It’s a shame that this was probably thebest quality car Rover ever made, but maybe
the least popular.
But Rover was like a cat on its 9th life,and there’s only so many opportunities you

(00:25):
get before it’s game over.
Anyway, on with the show.
The Rover 75 is a car with an identity crisis.
Is it the laid-back, easy listening, pipeand slippers Rover 75, the hard-driving, death-metal,

(00:47):
V8 monster that is the MG ZT, Or is it thewannabe Chinese Bentley sold as the MG7?
Personality disorder or not, why was a carthat received more investment than any Rover
before it dropped like a hot brick by itsparent company barely twelve months after

(01:07):
it was launched, while it was receiving glowingreviews?
This is the Rover 75 story!
For Rover, BMW’s purchase in 1994 was likea gift from God.

(01:28):
Instead of scrimping and scraping to get byon a meagre budget, Rover suddenly found they
had BMW’s open wallet to create the carsthey knew they could.
BMW made it clear that they trusted Roverand provided the money to make it happen.
So, what should Rover work on first?
As new Rover 200 & 400’s were about to belaunched, the cars they focused on were the

(01:53):
Mini, Rover 600 & the ageing Rover 800.
Both the 600 and 800 were deeply reliant onHonda technology, something BMW were understandably
keen to move away from.
Rover kicked off three projects to replaceboth cars.
The first was called “Flagship”, whichin the great British tradition was comically

(02:15):
nicknamed “Flashpig”.
It would be an 800 replacement.
“Eric” would be the new 800 coupé, with“Core” replacing the 600.
But soon Rover realised that not even BMW’sdeep pockets could finance three cars, so
this was paired down to just the “Core”project which was in hindsight awkwardly named

(02:36):
“Isis”, not after the Islamic terror organisationbut after the Egyptian god.
As for engines, Rover had a new V6 in theworks, the 2.0L and 2.5L KV6.
The 1.8L K-series workhorse, and BMW’s 2.0Ldiesel would round out the range.

(02:58):
Rover created a rough design for the new carthat played up the retro modern styling that
Rover thought would sell well.
Rover shouldn’t just be a copy of BMW; theyneeded their own identity.
Both companies believed that Rover shouldlean on their historic past, taking inspiration
from cars like the Rover P5, something youcould argue they’d already been doing with

(03:22):
the Rover 800 restyle.
But the new car would turn retro up to themax, like they were also doing already with
the new Mini.
So, a concept car was created along with claymodels, and these were green-lit with little
to no alterations by management or BMW.
The styling department loved the faith thatwas placed in them.

(03:43):
Rover was becoming a happier place to work.
The “Isis” project was renamed again to“RD1” and moved into development.
With the styling retro yet modern, the interiorstylists got to work using styling cues from
old Rovers.
They were also looking to Jaguar, who’slong-running XJ saloon had long been selling

(04:07):
on walnut-veneered olde-worlde English charm.
The Rover’s interior would make heavy useof wood, and instead of veneer it would be
solid wood that would be a part of the dashboardstructure.
But maybe Rover was going a little overboardwith the retro theming, producing what some
thought was an old-fashioned gentlemen’sclub on wheels.

(04:29):
This was confirmed with the suspension thatwas to be set up to be very soft and forgiving.
Unshackled from Honda’s wishbone suspension,Rover could finally choose their own setup.
But they dithered on a choice, which let todelays in the production date.
BMW management eventually had to step in andpick a solution for them – the Z-axle arrangement

(04:52):
used on the then-current BMW 3-series.
It was around this time cracks started toshow in the BMW / Rover relationship.
BMW was getting concerned that Rover couldn’tdeliver an excellent vehicle on time.
This soft, supple ride made Rover’s bodydesign an odd decision.

(05:13):
They went out of their way to make the 75’sbody much stiffer than previous Rover cars
to reduce body roll.
This was a technique employed by BMW to greateffect with their driver-orientated cars.
Confusingly Rover included a transmissiontunnel.
This is normally used for rear-wheel drivecars to hold the drivetrain, but the 75 was

(05:36):
front-wheel drive!
Rover insisted it was used to stiffen thebody, but surely there were cheaper ways to
do it than this?
It led to rumours the Rover was using a cast-offBMW rear-wheel drive 5-series body.
Although Rover had evaluated using the toolingfrom an old BMW 5-series plant in South Africa,

(05:56):
these had amounted to nothing.
As the car got closer to release BMW and Roverstarted quibbling over more and more things.
BMW were insistent on getting the detailsright, whereas Rover were less concerned and
saw the changes as wasted money.
But BMW’s attention to detail had stoodit in good stead in generating a reputation

(06:19):
for bullet-proof cars.
Rover had had years of cost-cutting and gettingout of that mindset would take it time.
However, it would amount to delays in therelease and angst between the English and
German teams.
BMW pushed the Rover 75 unveil forward atshort notice, and although it went off well

(06:40):
it created rumours in the press that the carhad been delayed because of quality issues,
when there were no such problems.
But all positive work Rover and BMW had doneto promote the car was torpedoed by the BMW
CEO, Bernd Pischetsrieder.
He was unhappy the British Government wasdragging their heels on funding for Longbridge

(07:02):
renovation, and gave the press his full frustration.
“Short-term actions are required for thelong-term future of the Rover Group,” he
said.
“Talks are taking place with the BritishGovernment about the whole problem.”.
Implying the new Rover 75 may not be aroundmuch longer was the kiss of death even before
the car had been launched!

(07:24):
The words hit the Rover staff hard, and moralesank.
As one employee said, “The reaction insidethe company was simple, gobsmacked amazement,
followed rapidly by panic.”.
Bernd, a first cousin once removed from Minicreator Sir Alec Issigonis, was instrumental
in buying Rover in 1994, and helped kill thedeal in 1999.

(07:48):
He wouldn’t see out the year as BMW CEO,clearing the way for a swift change of heart
about BMW’s investment in Rover.
After the press had printed their “Roverin crisis” stories, they reviewed the new
car, giving it high marks.
The quiet cabin and smooth suspension in particularwere praised.

(08:09):
But fleet managers didn’t know what to dowith it.
It was smaller than the BMW 5-series and itscompetitors, but larger than cars in the 3-series
category.
This was intentional - it was after all areplacement for both the Rover 600 and 800.
Like it or not cars were grouped togetherby size, and this odd-duck wasn’t easy to

(08:30):
categorise.
The Rover 75 style was “retro / modern”,but to customers it came off as just old-fashioned.
Rover wanted to establish a brand of traditional,comfortable cars, like the Jaguar, but it
came off as “pipe and slippers” boring.
The British car buying public weren’t lookingfor this.

(08:52):
They were watching Top Gear, and aspirationalcars of this size were the BMW M5 and Audi
RS6.
Not a gentlemen’s club on wheels with squishysuspension, harking back to cars they’d
never even heard of.
It’s easy to dismiss Rover’s “retro”styling move as misguided, but it wasn’t

(09:14):
an altogether bad idea.
The company’s update of the Mini which wasreleased about the same time has turned into
a runaway hit.
Customer sales were hard to find, and soonaerial photos of unsold cars reached the press.
Rover tried to change tack by showing a prototypeof the Rover 75 Sport, a sort-of gentlemen’s

(09:35):
club on wheels that sold Jaegerbombs, butby now BMW’s patience with Rover was wearing
thin.
Rover continued to lose money, and the 75hadn’t been the hit they’d hoped it would
be.
In May 2000 BMW sold Rover for the nominal,but insulting price of just £10.
And for that BMW agreed to GIVE the new holdingcompany Phoenix £500M to keep Rover ticking

(10:03):
over.
BMW kept the Mini brand which would go onto great things.
Phoenix, now renamed MG Rover – had to decidehow it would make the company profitable with
the cars it had.
But before all of that, BMW wanted the Cowleyfactory where the Rover 75 was produced.
Production was delayed while the line wasmoved up to Longbridge, and to the credit

(10:25):
of Rover it was done in record time.
Production quality at Longbridge would beend up being superior than the already high
quality at Cowley.
Although sales hadn’t met BMW’s expectations,the 75 was now the jewel in MG Rover’s crown
and was selling respectably.
So as the estate version had already beendeveloped, it seemed natural to put this into

(10:48):
production first.
The car was launched in 2001 as the 75 Tourer.
In 2002 a long-wheelbase version was sold,producing a car more similar in length to
the Rover 800.
The next move was to go all-in on the faster75 Sport concept.
In fact MG Rover was trying to turn all ofits existing models into “hotter” versions.

(11:14):
The 25 became the ZR, the 45 the ZS and theMG F the MG TF.
Suddenly the “pipe and slippers” Rover75 had to become a BMW M5 competitor.
The suspension was reworked to give a sportyride, the exterior was tweaked, and the interior
was updated from its retro wooden stylingto something more mean and sporty.

(11:38):
Oddly enough, despite the brakes being upratedthe engines weren’t any faster.
These new models - the ZT and ZT-T - wouldbe released in 2003 and would be sold alongside
the existing, more pedestrian Rover 75.
To add more power, a Ford 4.6L V8 petrol modelwas added, making the car rear-wheel drive

(12:03):
for the first time.
That overengineered transmission tunnel camein handy after all!
This beast of an engine, seen in the US inthe F-150 and many other cars, took the car
from 0-60 in 6.2 seconds and on to 155mph.
At the same time MG Rover looked to expandsales into new countries like Mexico.

(12:26):
In 2004 the cars got a light restyling tomake them look more “modern”.
But the changes weren’t a hit with customers.
MG Rover needed more funds to continue, soreached out to the Shanghai Automotive Industry
Corporation, or SAIC to create a joint venture.
A tentative agreement was made for SAIC totake a 70% stake in the company for a £1B

(12:52):
investment.
To showcase what could be produced with sucha deal, MG Rover released a Rover 75-based
coupé design, but with no money left thiswas little more than a fibreglass mock-up.
The agreement wasn’t ratified by the ChineseGovernment which left MG Rover with nowhere
to go.
All they got from SAIC was a licensing dealto build Rover 25 and 75’s in China, but

(13:18):
this wasn’t enough to save the company andMG Rover went into administration in April
2005 with a loss of 6,000 jobs.
The assets of the company were purchased byChinese Nanjing Automobile Group for £53M.
So SAIC had the rights to create the 75, butNanjing had also bought the 75.

(13:44):
What followed was a “75 face off” betweenthe two Chinese companies to see who could
launch their car first.
SAIC was out the gates first in 2006 withtheir “Roewe 750” with the same 1.8L and
2.5L petrol engines from the 75.
Nanjing’s “MG7” followed in 2007.

(14:08):
So, two car companies sold essentially thesame car in China, probably confusing a lot
of Chinese customers.
Thankfully SAIC purchased Nanjing Automotivein 2007, meaning the car was sold by only
one company.
Production continued until 2016 where it wasreplaced with the Roewe i6.

(14:32):
Between the UK and China, over 300,000 Rover75’s were sold over 17 years, quite an achievement
when the car was essentially hung out to dryjust after it was launched.
Nanjing still owns the MG name and still sellscars around the world with the MG badge on
them.

(14:52):
If I were to run the Rover 75 project, withhindsight of course, I’d shoot for something
in the Rover 600 bracket, a upmarket OpelVectra or Ford Mondeo competitor.
Something in the same market as the BMW 3series, and I’d use the same platform as
the 3 series and the same engines, but I’dfocus on making the Rover a different beast,

(15:15):
something differentiated from the 3 series.
Now, you could argue that BMW didn’t allowRover to use the platform, and that’s true,
but that was clearly BMW’s mistake – theywere duplicating effort for no reason.
And yes, Rover did differentiate the car fromthe BMW 3-series.
But the problem was Rover, like many car companiesat that time, were caught up in the fad for

(15:39):
retro styling.
The new VW Beetle had been such a hit thatcar companies were rifling through their old
brochures to do the same thing.
But the public didn’t have the same fondnessfor the Rover P5 as the Beetle.
It was never going to work.
Starting with replacing the Rover 600 wouldhave allowed Rover to eventually stretch the

(16:01):
platform to replace the 800, something MGRover eventually did with the 75.
As I said, the 75 fell between two categories,and Rover weren’t important enough to create
their own category!
I’m sure the 75 got left off customers listwhen comparison shopping cars in a certain
category.

(16:22):
The styling meant customers weren’t keenon the car, and that showed Rover’s designers
were out of touch with what the public wanted.
The restyling work they did in the 2000s wasn’tany better and showed MG Rover were still
out of touch with what customers wanted.
It’s a similar thing that befell Jaguarwith the S-Type.

(16:43):
But the real nail in the coffin for the 75was BMW’s mistake in buying the company
in the first place.
They didn’t have the capital to turn thislarge ship around before it hit the iceberg,
and it nearly brought BMW down themselves.
The Rover 75 was the casualty in all this,and no amount of rebranding by MG Rover would

(17:05):
have fixed it.
Customers were wary of a company that wasnear bankruptcy, and this time they weren’t
going to be bailed out by the Government.
That meant MG Rover had to discount theircars, and no car company can survive like
that for long.
If you like this podcast then please let peopleknow, and leave me a rating and review.

(17:25):
If you want to see these podcasts as a videothen take a look at my YouTube channel.
Thanks for listening and I’ll see you inthe next episode!