Sierra Cosworth on Wheeler Dealers - 400 bhp?

[s m]

interloper said:

It will be interesting seeing this episode. I have no idea (obviously) what spec the engine actually is but I do know that RWD Cosworths were rather hamstrung by the old trailing arm suspension when it came to getting off the line, especially if it wasn't set up right.

The in gear acceleration would be much more telling and relevant but I doubt that's mentioned on the show!

I tried to see if it was online anywhere as well

You can watch the whole programme in 5 parts albeit with a foreign soundtrack dubbed but here is the acceleration bit

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OvNEjmXtE1s

As you say, they have a semi trailing arm like a few sports saloons of that era - see also E30 BMWs such as 325i and M3 and also the old E28 - so it's not necessarily a detriment to good handling (although on an E36 Compact it is according to many ). However, if they are excessively lowered and/or the bushes and mounts are shot, the tendency of the rear suspension as the car squats under acceleration and weight transfer is to introduce more negative camber onto the rear tyres. This means you have less grip in a straight line. The Merc 190s had a more sophisticated multilink rear set up that was subject to much less toe and camber change through the suspension travel.

[s m]

markcoznottz said:

I wouldn't read too much into road tests of those cars when new, the vehicles tested by performance car mag and autocrat were both remapped to give better figures.

I'm not sure where Autocar had theirs 'remapped' then as 0-60 in 6.6 seconds for their roadtest car seems about bang on (or slightly less than I'd expect) for a 4wd 220bhp 1300kg car. Who told you they'd had it remapped and where was it done? What figures would you expect a standard new one to attain out of interest?



As an aside, Performance Car mag tested ( with timing gear ) a BBR tuned version with 315bhp ish alongside a Countach. They obtained a 0-60 time just under 5 seconds ( and a smoking clutch! )

[Nedzilla]

I seem to remember the 0-60 times quoted at the time were 5.8-6.0sec for the 2wd saph and 6.0-6.6sec for the 4wd depending where you read it.Generally though the 2wd was always quoted as being slightly quicker in standard trim.

[s m]

Nedzilla said:

I seem to remember the 0-60 times quoted at the time were 5.8-6.0sec for the 2wd saph and 6.0-6.6sec for the 4wd depending where you read it.Generally though the 2wd was always quoted as being slightly quicker in standard trim.

Yes, that's about right , the 2wd was a bit quicker to 60 - had less power but less weight too. Maybe less traction meant the engine was less likely to bog down than on the 4wd - some 4wd cars can be hard to launch. The 2wd XR4i V6 was a similar margin faster from a standing start than the XR4x4 with the same 2.8 engine

The Wheeler Dealers car was a 4wd version though I believe

[Neilsfirst]

It was a 4wd but converted to 2wd, IIRC.

[s m]

Neilsfirst said:

It was a 4wd but converted to 2wd, IIRC.

Not too bad then if they matched the old road test time for, albeit, a standard car. Depends how many attempts they had. I'm sure that time could be bettered with a lack of mechanical sympathy though!