Talk:Rover P5

Post-Production
How could Margaret Thatcher order a fleet of P5s 6 years after production ended? 22:47, 1 December 2007 Conollyb

As outlined in the text, the last fleet of Rover P5s were reserved for government use, hence why Thatcher phased in the P5s as so that nobody in her government at least would be driven around in her view of the "hidious" SD1. PoliceChief 00:14, 2 December 2007 (UTC) (And please poser of question sign your posts)

"Middle-class" Rolls-Royce?
What's the source for the label "middle class Rolls-Royce"? It seems to have been rather more than just a "middle class" car if it was the favoured car of Queen and Government. Quite the aristocrat, in fact. 81.151.145.119 (talk) 22:19, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Mark 1 or Mark II ?
The photo captioned as a 1960 model looks like a Mark II to me - or at least a Mark 1a - as it doesn't have the glass wind deflectors over the windows. RGCorris (talk) 15:05, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The fellow who added the bit about the glass wind deflectors to the text looks as though he knows what he's talking (writing) about. So yes, I agree with you.  (I do dimly remember how those glass deflectors looked, though I didn't know they were a standard feature, nor that they disappeared with the arrival of the Mk II.)   Why don't you move the picture to the next info box?
 * It's a pity we don't appear to have access to a wiki- picture of one of the really early 3-litres - ie with the deflectors fitted. Most of the P5s one sees around seem to be the more recent ones, but I guess we just need to keep an eye open for one of the early ones and hope to have a camera handy if and when....   I do remember as a kid seeing one of those cars turn up in the Market Place in Cambridge apparently with Harold Wilson in it:  now that would have been a picture worth getting, especially if it had been a Mark I.   I think there were some students shouting at the car containing Wilson because they disapproved of the Greek government: no doubt it all made sense at the time.
 * I guess it's also a pity we don't see the registration number on the picture in question, because if we did we could access the date of first registration using the vehicle enquiry facility on the British Tax Gatherers' database at
 * http://www.taxdisc.direct.gov.uk/EvlPortalApp/.
 * But from what you write, we're already confident beyond reasonable doubt that the picture currently shown as a Mk I isn't. Thanks for the eagle eyed attention.  Regards  Charles01 (talk) 17:10, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure whether the wind deflectors were dropped for the Mk 1-A - they certainly were not on the Mk II. My father had a Mk II and I recall the lack of deflectors being the most obvious external visual difference from the Mk 1, but I wasn't previously aware of the 1-A. Ergo I asked the question to see if someone could give a definitive answer rather than change the caption. RGCorris (talk) 17:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Wish they would stop using the epithet Poor mans Rolls Royce. It generally means anything with leather and wood and a reasonable finish. It was applied to the Austin A60 upmarket version, the 4 Litre R and a few others. But to my recollection the phrase was first coined for the Ford [Zephyr4] the square one which had acres of leather. That would be about 1962. Rover was certainly never a poor mans rolls Royce, indeed in some respects it was far better.Ps fly screens as they were known ceased after 1A Regards (user:[LeoRoverman| LeoRoverman])(User Talk:LeoRoverman|Talk]) 18:44 09/07/2011` — Preceding unsigned comment added by LeoRoverman (talk • contribs) 17:45, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

HM's P5B
Don't know how to cite it, but for the "citation needed" part of Her Majesty's P5, there's a youtube video out there of an old Top Gear: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D-Kc7UL24wQ

The registration is JGY280. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 144.32.20.79 (talk) 10:11, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

Styling
It is not often noted now that this car's pleasing shape (a great relief from er distinctive predecessors and successors) is a simple and direct copy of the 1955 model Chrysler Corporation body shape. Eddaido (talk) 23:51, 6 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Ridiculous. It shows more heritage from earlier Rover models than it does from the Chrysler you illustrate. There is a certain "lead sled" style to both, which was almost anachronistic by the time of the P5, and has since been one of its most appreciated styling cues - especially in the UK, where few other saloons showed such a style. However several features ar pure Rover: look at the high "bathtub" waistline, which is dead straight and quite independent of influence from the pillars or wheel arches. The Chysler also shows a nipped-in waist on the doorline, where the widest part is below the trim stripe at the wheelarch top level. The P5 instead has flat sides here, with a tumblehome above this, up to the glass level. A further Rover feature (and in direct contradiction to the Chrysler, although Rover shared this distinctively with Rolls -Royce) is that the headlights are inboard from the wings. The wings carry the side lights (front markers), but not the main lights. Andy Dingley (talk) 00:32, 7 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Certainly these days when I catch a glimpse of Chrysler from Mercedes out of the corner of my eye, I think of a sort of updated P5.  Proportions, window angles, grill etc...   (Works better with "traditional" P5 than with the coupe you've illustrated here which I (as an averagely tall person who doesn't understand the concept of paying more for less) always thought looked a bit silly.)   All a bit approximate when you get close and study the thing, but when one passes in the other direction on a country highway that's not how you see it.   Happy Sunday.  Charles01 (talk) 04:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, now I see what you mean. Have a good week, Eddaido (talk) 01:32, 8 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Lots of cars have similar desing cues for example Volvo 121/Amazon has cues from Alfa Romeo 1900.-- >Typ932 T&middot;C 15:36, 24 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, that's so true and it is who did it first that gets the credit. When the 1955 Chrysler Corporation cars came out in Autumn 1954 they were (necessarily because their whole range then very outdated and Not Selling - Sales: calendar 1954: 883,769 units, 1955: 1,579,215 units) beautifully clean and simple (Ghia responsible) and so very much copied. The Volvo Amazon and the Rover P5 were both noted at the time for their straightforward imitations (fee-earner for Ghia?). You don't believe me? Well (e.g.) look at the Volvo Amazon item in A-Z of Cars 1945-1970, Michael Sedgwick and Mark Gillies, Bay View Books, first published 1986. I quote "Unitary four-door Amazon with '55 Chrysler styling." Eddaido (talk) 00:07, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * See what you mean about the Alfa but it was not really a pretty car, too sober - too much like the Singer (yet so far from so awful!). The Chryslers were fresh and good looking and quite delicately shaped overall and in detail as were the P5 and the Amazon. Their creases and sharp edges to headlights (P5 the sidelights) and things were to successfully leave behind the almost shapeless melting ice-cream look. Anyway it was not My comment, I was just recalling it and noting it. Wish I could find better illustrations in Wikimedia. Eddaido (talk) 07:07, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Jaguar 1968 - 1974 XJ6 Series 1
May I also point out the similarity between the 300 and the XJ6 series 1 - the latter, obviously being the more beautiful.



173.181.0.10 (talk) 08:44, 25 September 2013 (UTC)Dave