Classic (old, retro) cars for sale £0-5k
Discussion
s m said:
Fast Bug said:
My friends younger brother had one of these. Proper hoot to drive 
www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C819214
That's the UK version of the Rallye, engine was like the XS and GT ....but not as hardcore as the continental 1.3 Rallyewww.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C819214
All the 205s were pretty good to steer .....and the gawkier 309 cousins
I think Chris Harris bought a proper Rallye to go with his XS
From memory the UK Rallye was 75bhp, but the XS was 85bhp. Both weighing the same as a biscuit tin made it very quick
I don't know enough about them to tell you.
The XS is great fun and the engine makes a fantastic noise. But the GTI is an upgrade in almost every conceivable way and 'wringing the neck' of one to me is more fun than wringing the neck of something which is essentially the same car, but with ~50bhp less and a poorer suspension setup. Same with the 1.6 vs 1.9. Now my main 1.9 has the flywheel and gearbox from a 1.6 so I have the extra BHP but with the same rev-happy performance (due to the lighter flywheel) and the slightly closer ratios, but with the extra performance of the 1.9 engine. If you drove a standard 1.6 and 1.9 back to back then I can see how someone would like the 1.6 but the best of both is how most people go these days.
Honestly i'm not trying to be a knob so sorry if I am. I've had a few beers and like I said, pretty much all I do outside of work is 205 related.
The XS is great fun and the engine makes a fantastic noise. But the GTI is an upgrade in almost every conceivable way and 'wringing the neck' of one to me is more fun than wringing the neck of something which is essentially the same car, but with ~50bhp less and a poorer suspension setup. Same with the 1.6 vs 1.9. Now my main 1.9 has the flywheel and gearbox from a 1.6 so I have the extra BHP but with the same rev-happy performance (due to the lighter flywheel) and the slightly closer ratios, but with the extra performance of the 1.9 engine. If you drove a standard 1.6 and 1.9 back to back then I can see how someone would like the 1.6 but the best of both is how most people go these days.
Honestly i'm not trying to be a knob so sorry if I am. I've had a few beers and like I said, pretty much all I do outside of work is 205 related.
One is a Lotus Carlton, so an all-time performance icon and general legendary car that was so far ahead of its time, it was mindblowing.
The other is a Vauxhall Senator, which was a pretty decent car and related to the Carlton. Looks like a 3.0 Dual Ram, so it has a little over half the power of the Carlton
The other is a Vauxhall Senator, which was a pretty decent car and related to the Carlton. Looks like a 3.0 Dual Ram, so it has a little over half the power of the Carlton
Challo said:
s m said:
Fast Bug said:
My friends younger brother had one of these. Proper hoot to drive
www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C819214
That's the UK version of the Rallye, engine was like the XS and GT ....but not as hardcore as the continental 1.3 Rallyewww.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C819214
All the 205s were pretty good to steer .....and the gawkier 309 cousins
I think Chris Harris bought a proper Rallye to go with his XS
From memory the UK Rallye was 75bhp, but the XS was 85bhp. Both weighing the same as a biscuit tin made it very quick
The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
s m said:
The Rallye was an iron block engine and about 75bhp as you say - didn't have the SFD and ratios like the XS had either.
The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
Mmmmm, you sure? I can't say I've looked at one first hand, but a UK Rallye having an iron block goes against every grain of common sense surrounding the TU. The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd be amazed if you're right.
LookAtMyCat said:
I don't know enough about them to tell you.
OK well let me helpThe first one has 400 bhp and will do 180 mph and 0-60 in under 5
The second one has 204 bhp will do 150 mph and 0-60 in 8
Both are RWD no driver aids except ABS
Does that help with your choice?
LookAtMyCat said:
The XS is great fun and the engine makes a fantastic noise. But the GTI is an upgrade in almost every conceivable way and 'wringing the neck' of one to me is more fun than wringing the neck of something which is essentially the same car, but with ~50bhp less and a poorer suspension setup. Same with the 1.6 vs 1.9.
Owned and driven all three - my vote still goes to the XS every time because the handling is not whelmed by the engine - you can use more of the 85 bhp more of the time than you can use 115 or 130LookAtMyCat said:
Now my main 1.9 has the flywheel and gearbox from a 1.6 so I have the extra BHP but with the same rev-happy performance (due to the lighter flywheel) and the slightly closer ratios, but with the extra performance of the 1.9 engine. If you drove a standard 1.6 and 1.9 back to back then I can see how someone would like the 1.6 but the best of both is how most people go these days.
But now you are talking about modified cars rather than factory anything can be improved and also easily ruined LookAtMyCat said:
Honestly i'm not trying to be a knob so sorry if I am. I've had a few beers and like I said, pretty much all I do outside of work is 205 related.
This was my XS (I know it's in a posh frock but it's underpinnings were XS running a 35 IBSH carb it was far more responsive than the injection 1.6 that replaced it)
It was back in 1987 one of the best cars for steering on the throttle I have ever driven - the GTi 1.6 that replaced it wasn't half as much fun and that's the point I'm making.
Jimmy Recard said:
One is a Lotus Carlton, so an all-time performance icon and general legendary car that was so far ahead of its time, it was mindblowing.
The other is a Vauxhall Senator, which was a pretty decent car and related to the Carlton. Looks like a 3.0 Dual Ram, so it has a little over half the power of the Carlton
10/10The other is a Vauxhall Senator, which was a pretty decent car and related to the Carlton. Looks like a 3.0 Dual Ram, so it has a little over half the power of the Carlton
So it's raining and outside temp is around zero you have 60 miles of twisty A road to cover in 50 mins
Which one would you pick
B'stard Child said:
10/10
So it's raining and outside temp is around zero you have 60 miles of twisty A road to cover in 50 mins
Which one would you pick
I would want to take the Lotus because I'm unlikely to drive another and I've loved them since I first saw one.So it's raining and outside temp is around zero you have 60 miles of twisty A road to cover in 50 mins
Which one would you pick
Which would you recommend?
Don't get me wrong, I like Senators too. I'd love a manual 3.0 CD 24 valve
Jimmy Recard said:
B'stard Child said:
10/10
So it's raining and outside temp is around zero you have 60 miles of twisty A road to cover in 50 mins
Which one would you pick
I would want to take the Lotus because I'm unlikely to drive another and I've loved them since I first saw one.So it's raining and outside temp is around zero you have 60 miles of twisty A road to cover in 50 mins
Which one would you pick
Which would you recommend?
Don't get me wrong, I like Senators too. I'd love a manual 3.0 CD 24 valve
The Lotus - well that thing would have me in a hedge backwards faster than I'd like when up against a time deadline and on twisty roads and I know it very well indeed.
This was the point lost earlier - being able to use pretty much all the power all of the time makes for a fun drive, adding more power sometimes means less fun because you can't use it all with total confidence.
Edited by B'stard Child on Tuesday 3rd January 00:19
Jimmy Recard said:
I was expecting something like that. I'd take my one and only chance to drive a Lotus Carlton and maybe be late!
In your position owning both, I'd probably do the same as you suggest
If you are ever this way in the summer shoot me a PM - might be able to help you pop that cherry LC wiseIn your position owning both, I'd probably do the same as you suggest
I'll see what I can do!Kitchski said:
s m said:
The Rallye was an iron block engine and about 75bhp as you say - didn't have the SFD and ratios like the XS had either.
The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
Mmmmm, you sure? I can't say I've looked at one first hand, but a UK Rallye having an iron block goes against every grain of common sense surrounding the TU. The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd be amazed if you're right.
They were a bit of a 'bitsa' iirc - nothing like the 1.3 Rallye engines. The Iron blocks were used in the very late AX GTs as well I think as well as the AX GTi
Pretty sure my friend's K-reg was an iron blocked 205 Rallye at least
One easy way to find out anyway!
Edited by s m on Tuesday 3rd January 01:41
Edited by s m on Tuesday 3rd January 01:42
Kitchski said:
s m said:
The Rallye was an iron block engine and about 75bhp as you say - didn't have the SFD and ratios like the XS had either.
The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
Mmmmm, you sure? I can't say I've looked at one first hand, but a UK Rallye having an iron block goes against every grain of common sense surrounding the TU. The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd be amazed if you're right.
A bit more looking around seems to suggest the vast majority of UK 205 Rallyes were a TU3.2 K2D iron block available initially with a Solex carb and later on with monopoint injection.
I'm sure there'll be some early production model with an alloy block engine though just to confuse matters!
s m said:
Kitchski said:
s m said:
The Rallye was an iron block engine and about 75bhp as you say - didn't have the SFD and ratios like the XS had either.
The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
Mmmmm, you sure? I can't say I've looked at one first hand, but a UK Rallye having an iron block goes against every grain of common sense surrounding the TU. The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd be amazed if you're right.
A bit more looking around seems to suggest the vast majority of UK 205 Rallyes were a TU3.2 K2D iron block available initially with a Solex carb and later on with monopoint injection.
I'm sure there'll be some early production model with an alloy block engine though just to confuse matters!
Sounds like the UK Rallye was, well, s
te. Tall gearing, iron block, basic suspension.....it was just some stickers and steelies really. The XS would have been much better.Regards the late AX GTs, I knew the very late ones went to SPFI when cats became compulsory, but have never actually seen one. Seen plenty of mk2 GTs, but they're still running the K2A spec. I suppose it's possible they had the K2D, but hopefully with the proper gearbox.
Kitchski said:
s m said:
Kitchski said:
s m said:
The Rallye was an iron block engine and about 75bhp as you say - didn't have the SFD and ratios like the XS had either.
The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
Mmmmm, you sure? I can't say I've looked at one first hand, but a UK Rallye having an iron block goes against every grain of common sense surrounding the TU. The XS was all Alloy engine, early tune was about 79bhp ( XY) and then went to 85bhp ( TU3S )
I'm not saying you're wrong, but I'd be amazed if you're right.
A bit more looking around seems to suggest the vast majority of UK 205 Rallyes were a TU3.2 K2D iron block available initially with a Solex carb and later on with monopoint injection.
I'm sure there'll be some early production model with an alloy block engine though just to confuse matters!
Sounds like the UK Rallye was, well, s
te. Tall gearing, iron block, basic suspension.....it was just some stickers and steelies really. The XS would have been much better.Regards the late AX GTs, I knew the very late ones went to SPFI when cats became compulsory, but have never actually seen one. Seen plenty of mk2 GTs, but they're still running the K2A spec. I suppose it's possible they had the K2D, but hopefully with the proper gearbox.
On a tangent, I remember my friend's B-reg 1.6 ( 105bhp ) 205 Gti being unreasonably fast compared to later 115bhp 1.6s and even 1.9s. We never did find out why - maybe it was just a very good/well run-in example
s m said:
Yes, the UK Rallye was nothing like the Continental spec 1.3 on, or even the XS. ( I didn't realise there was a German spec 1.9 205 Rallye as well ( 105bhp 1.9 ). OUr friend was duped slightly when he bought his one....we told him he should have got a GTi!
On a tangent, I remember my friend's B-reg 1.6 ( 105bhp ) 205 Gti being unreasonably fast compared to later 115bhp 1.6s and even 1.9s. We never did find out why - maybe it was just a very good/well run-in example
I knew about the 105bhp 1.9, as I thought, briefly, that I had the cylinder head from one of those on the BX GT I'm doing up for my Dad. There is a 115bhp version of the XU9 out there too, somewhere. Can't remember which market it was, but it was probably a low-comp version of the 120bhp version, designed for the markets where cats were compulsory even in the 1980's. On a tangent, I remember my friend's B-reg 1.6 ( 105bhp ) 205 Gti being unreasonably fast compared to later 115bhp 1.6s and even 1.9s. We never did find out why - maybe it was just a very good/well run-in example
Sometimes you just get quick cars. I fitted a VTS engine into the wife's Saxo VTR, and for some reason it's kicking out about 130-132bhp. Goes like stink, yet is a standard engine. But then I get lots of Peugeots on the dyno which beat their book power figures, and it's usually the more basic smaller engined stuff.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff