RE: Shed of the Week: Ford Escort Encore
Discussion
Ahbefive said:
Yep, thats a pretty stupid thing to say "car nut". Supras, Skylines, Evos Imprezas, 200sx, 205 gti, 306 gti/rallye, TVRs, DC2, Clio Williams/172, Cosworths, mk1 Focus, e36, 106/saxo etc etc the list is endless.
Some of my own - Citroen BX16V, ZX16V, 1.7 Puma.Edited by Ahbefive on Monday 6th March 22:25
The Escort was more Escort than sierra. So many other cars shared complete running gear etc. So would we now also say the Fiesta RS1800 is an Escort because it then took all the running gear, engine suspension etc. from the mk5 Escort XR3i.
The other post re. the 306, Megane, Rover etc - well they were a nicer drive, and all the reviews at the time agreed.
The Cosworth, yes that was great but there wasn't much Escort in it!
Hub said:
Escort Si-130 said:
All the cars listed by balmoral are flppin s
t, would rather slit my wrists than drive one.
Calm down! It might have been sarcastic!t, would rather slit my wrists than drive one.Fastchas said:
Balmoral said:
In 1995 you could have bought something much better, like a Lada Samara or a Skoda Favorit, or even pushed the boat right out on something as amazingly cutting edge as a Daewoo Nexia.
The Samara was not better. A friend bought one, a hateful car. Worst car he ever owned he said, and he sold a Reliant Robin to buy it!The other post re. the 306, Megane, Rover etc - well they were a nicer drive, and all the reviews at the time agreed.
The Cosworth, yes that was great but there wasn't much Escort in it!
Most cars in the 1980's rusted badly.
Joey Deacon said:
My first car in 1992 was a 1985 MK3 Escort Popular 1100, an earlier poster pointed out that this would be the equivalent of buying a 10 plate car today.
Soon after buying it I started prodding the crusty bits with a screwdriver and before I knew it all the wheel arches and sections of the underside were missing vast amounts of paint. I decided I could buy a similar colour (maroon) hammerite which would stop it getting any worse and blend seemlessly in with the existing paintwork. You can imagine how that looked when I finished.....
At 60k miles the gear selector was so worn that you didn't know if the car was in first or reverse, lots of fun at traffic lights. Also the rear light connections were so corroded that I had to rewire the whole thing. One day the speedo stopped working which is due to the plastic drive wheel being chewed up as there is so much wear in the gearbox.
If I bought a 10 plate car today I would expect it to be rust free and still be tight to drive, scary to think how terrible a 7 year old car was 25 years ago.
Soon after buying it I started prodding the crusty bits with a screwdriver and before I knew it all the wheel arches and sections of the underside were missing vast amounts of paint. I decided I could buy a similar colour (maroon) hammerite which would stop it getting any worse and blend seemlessly in with the existing paintwork. You can imagine how that looked when I finished.....
At 60k miles the gear selector was so worn that you didn't know if the car was in first or reverse, lots of fun at traffic lights. Also the rear light connections were so corroded that I had to rewire the whole thing. One day the speedo stopped working which is due to the plastic drive wheel being chewed up as there is so much wear in the gearbox.
If I bought a 10 plate car today I would expect it to be rust free and still be tight to drive, scary to think how terrible a 7 year old car was 25 years ago.
Maybe the drive of it, other than that the mk2 Golf was primitive. Sitting inside it was comparative of a commercial vehicle of the same era. The mk3 Golf was much better imo.
white_goodman said:
Mr2Mike said:
The Mk2 Golf was so much better than the Escort is almost every area (except perhaps price) that they hardly bear comparison.
OK, so you're saying that an '86 Golf is a much better car than a '96 Escort? I can well believe that the mk2 Golf was a much better car than the contemporary mk3/4 Escorts but one that's 10 years newer? I have reason to believe that the mk6 Escort was a significant revision over the original mk5 with a much improved interior in terms of both design and materials and also much improved handling over the quite rightly vilified mk5 and contemporary road tests suggested that it was no longer worst in class and had become the car that perhaps the mk5 always should have been. I recall most of the road tests that I read at the time were for the 1.6/1.8 Zetec-engined versions but surely the only difference is the engine, which is slow granted but not enough to ruin the whole car in my experience. If I'm still wrong then I stand corrected but if I had been gifted one of these back in 97/98 compared to what most of my friends were driving at the time, I think that I would have been pretty happy. Escort Si-130 said:
Maybe the drive of it, other than that the mk2 Golf was primitive. Sitting inside it was comparative of a commercial vehicle of the same era. The mk3 Golf was much better imo.
Yeah of course it was, the Mk 3 weighed a lot more, had much more weedy engines (until the VR6 was dropped in which was really an entirely different car), so had lethargic performance, the handling was rubbery at best, and it rusted worse. The Mk 3 was easily the worst iteration of the Golf to date.white_goodman said:
Mr2Mike said:
The Mk2 Golf was so much better than the Escort is almost every area (except perhaps price) that they hardly bear comparison.
OK, so you're saying that an '86 Golf is a much better car than a '96 Escort? I can well believe that the mk2 Golf was a much better car than the contemporary mk3/4 Escorts but one that's 10 years newer? I have reason to believe that the mk6 Escort was a significant revision over the original mk5 with a much improved interior in terms of both design and materials and also much improved handling over the quite rightly vilified mk5 and contemporary road tests suggested that it was no longer worst in class and had become the car that perhaps the mk5 always should have been. I recall most of the road tests that I read at the time were for the 1.6/1.8 Zetec-engined versions but surely the only difference is the engine, which is slow granted but not enough to ruin the whole car in my experience. If I'm still wrong then I stand corrected but if I had been gifted one of these back in 97/98 compared to what most of my friends were driving at the time, I think that I would have been pretty happy. I drove a Mk5 Escort XR3i way back around 98-99. Standard apart from a set of Koni adjustables. It wasn't a bad car. Pretty cool in fact as there wasn't a lot of them around. I always remember it had nice seats. The rear floor pan was a bit rusty and I didn't have time to do anything with it so I put in in the back of my grandads barn. It's still there but I haven't seen it for a couple of years. Last time I saw it, it looked pretty much how I left it albeit covered in bird st. I'll get around to putting it back on the road in the next couple of years. Despite what all the haters say it WILL be worth a fair bit in a few years time.
t. I'll get around to putting it back on the road in the next couple of years. Despite what all the haters say it WILL be worth a fair bit in a few years time. Kitchski said:
MarshPhantom said:
Some of my own - Citroen BX16V, ZX16V, 1.7 Puma.
BX 16v was very much a car of the 80's, to be fair 
But I also think the 90's was a good era. The noughties has been easily worse! That said, I think the 50's were a good era too. The Mini, the DS, the D-Type - there was heaps of clever stuff in the 50's.
I have read through the comments above with interest, but how many of you actually drove through the entire duration of both the 80s and the 90s as I did? Those of you who did please all take step forward and show yourselves, and we can debate the question from a position of knowledge.
I perceive a profound ignorance of the typical cars that one found on the roads, and of those that the vast majority of people actually bought in the 1990s - cars like the Rover 100, Escort Mk 5 and Cavalier Mk 3 were wildly popular, totally ubiquitous, and utterly dreadful. If people wanted something sporty they more often than not bought the Vauxhall Calibra (as the slogan went "Vauxhall's stunning start to the 90s"), this was basically just a Cavalier in drag, with similarly awful dynamics, yet they were everywhere.
As I actually drove an 80s car all through the 90s, and frequently drove a wide variety of hire cars on business I believe that I am in a very good position to judge the relative merits of cars of the two decades, and how their dynamic prowess was blunted by the evils of increasing size and weight, catalytic converters, and the spread of power steering.
In my view the nadir was fro new models introduced between about 1989 and about 1996 (although of course this varied between manufacturers). But of course not all cars were dreadful - the one mass market car of the period that I actually enjoyed driving was the Mk1 Mondeo, whose only vices in my eyes were a tendency to excessive forward weight transfer, and consequent squirrelliness, under heavy braking and a poor gear change on some examples. In my view this is the exception that proves the rule.
Journalists always rave about new models, fuelled by all expenses paid stays in 5 Star hotels in exotic locations at product launches, not to mention expensively purchased advertising space in their magazines. If you don't believe me, somewhere in the loft, I have the copy of Autocar/Motor with the initial road test of the Morris Ital in it, which under "Handling and Steering" raves about how precise the steering is, better than its competitors, forgetting to mention anything about handling. So do not take much credence on anything, other than news, that you read in the motoring press, who have a Faustian relationship with the motor industry.
I perceive a profound ignorance of the typical cars that one found on the roads, and of those that the vast majority of people actually bought in the 1990s - cars like the Rover 100, Escort Mk 5 and Cavalier Mk 3 were wildly popular, totally ubiquitous, and utterly dreadful. If people wanted something sporty they more often than not bought the Vauxhall Calibra (as the slogan went "Vauxhall's stunning start to the 90s"), this was basically just a Cavalier in drag, with similarly awful dynamics, yet they were everywhere.
As I actually drove an 80s car all through the 90s, and frequently drove a wide variety of hire cars on business I believe that I am in a very good position to judge the relative merits of cars of the two decades, and how their dynamic prowess was blunted by the evils of increasing size and weight, catalytic converters, and the spread of power steering.
In my view the nadir was fro new models introduced between about 1989 and about 1996 (although of course this varied between manufacturers). But of course not all cars were dreadful - the one mass market car of the period that I actually enjoyed driving was the Mk1 Mondeo, whose only vices in my eyes were a tendency to excessive forward weight transfer, and consequent squirrelliness, under heavy braking and a poor gear change on some examples. In my view this is the exception that proves the rule.
Journalists always rave about new models, fuelled by all expenses paid stays in 5 Star hotels in exotic locations at product launches, not to mention expensively purchased advertising space in their magazines. If you don't believe me, somewhere in the loft, I have the copy of Autocar/Motor with the initial road test of the Morris Ital in it, which under "Handling and Steering" raves about how precise the steering is, better than its competitors, forgetting to mention anything about handling. So do not take much credence on anything, other than news, that you read in the motoring press, who have a Faustian relationship with the motor industry.
Car_Nut said:
Sorry but I just don't agree with you - obviously not all cars of the 90s were awful, every decade managed to produce something decent - even the 50s managed to produce cars like the Jaguar D Type and the Porsche 356 (OK developed in the 40's).
You shot yourself in the foot when you start to mention cars that had 80s equivalents - are you seriously suggesting that the BMW E36 was a better car than the E30, or that the Clio Williams was a better car than the R5 Turbo? In fairness I think that the cars of the 90s began to improve again at the end of the decade, with cars like the Peugeot 406 and the Mk 1 Focus, both of which were vast improvements on their predecessors (not hard in either case).
I was around and driving in both the 80s and the 90s, somehow I doubt that you were...
Of course at the time the roads were so full of Imprezas and Skylines that one could hardly move for them, it must be my dodgy memory to recall that roads were full of new Rover 100s, Mk 4 & 5 Escorts, Mk2 Fiestas, Montegos, Vectras, Nissan Sunnys, Almeras, Renault 21s, etc. This week's SOTW is apiece of typical 90s fayre, that serves only remind us how awful the common fayre was in that decade.
Most of the cars you mention were 1980s, not 1990s cars. With the exception of the mk5 Escort, possibly some Mercedes models and perhaps the mk3 Golf, I'm struggling to think of any 1990s cars that were worse than their predecessors. mk1 Mondeo, mk1 Primera, mk1 Laguna, mk3 Polo, mk4 Fiesta, Rover 200/400/600 etc, I could go on. In fact in many cases and I'm thinking Primera, Laguna, Polo chiefly here and most of the "07" model Peugeots, the 2000s replacements were worse. I may have only passed my test in '97 but I have had plenty of experience of 1980s and 1990s cars, so feelYou shot yourself in the foot when you start to mention cars that had 80s equivalents - are you seriously suggesting that the BMW E36 was a better car than the E30, or that the Clio Williams was a better car than the R5 Turbo? In fairness I think that the cars of the 90s began to improve again at the end of the decade, with cars like the Peugeot 406 and the Mk 1 Focus, both of which were vast improvements on their predecessors (not hard in either case).
I was around and driving in both the 80s and the 90s, somehow I doubt that you were...
Of course at the time the roads were so full of Imprezas and Skylines that one could hardly move for them, it must be my dodgy memory to recall that roads were full of new Rover 100s, Mk 4 & 5 Escorts, Mk2 Fiestas, Montegos, Vectras, Nissan Sunnys, Almeras, Renault 21s, etc. This week's SOTW is apiece of typical 90s fayre, that serves only remind us how awful the common fayre was in that decade.
Edited by Car_Nut on Monday 6th March 23:25
that I am qualified to express an opinion. My dad always bought a new car every 3 years in the 1980s (Citroen, VW, Fiat, Peugeot, Renault) and even the legendary mk2 Polo was garbage after 3 years. When he moved on to 1990s diesels (Peugeots and Citroens mostly), he was able to double their life cycle and was probably doing double the miles too and the cars were still decent when he had finished with them. His first turbodiesel, a '98 Citroen Xsara was quite a revelation compared to the normally aspirated diesels that he had owned previously.
In my ownership experience, I can confirm that my mk3 Astra was a lot more refined, better-built and having crashed it, more solid than my friend's mum's mk2 Astra that I regularly used to ride in, where the floorpan used to flex under my feet during cornering! The only thing that it did better was straight line speed (1.8 SRi vs. 1.4) and looks. You also mention the E30 BMW. Having owned an E30 325i, I am also a fan and was never that taken with the E36 but even I would concede, that it was roomier, more refined had more powerful engines and was better on fuel with a more sophisticated rear suspension too.
I get to drive a lot of new cars through my work and they are mostly fairly pleasant to drive but boringly so. The new Civic that I drove last week practically drove itself and my old 2013 Civic always felt very edgy in slippery conditions and I felt that sometimes the ESP was the only thing keeping me on the road. I sold it and bought a 2010 MINI Cooper, which just feels better set-up and more enjoyable out of the box and the ESP rarely needs to intervene. I realise that there was a lot of crap in the 1990s (the mk5 Escort and mk3 Astra being good examples) too but give me a Pug 306/406, Citroen ZX/Xantia, E36/E46 3-Series, E39 5-series over the modern equivalents for a more satisfying drive anyday and they all drive pretty well without the need for nannying electronics too.
Edited by white_goodman on Wednesday 8th March 04:14
On the subject of 80's and 90's cars, I think people are missing the point, yes there were new cars that came out in the 90's, but there was nothing new, they were basically the same as the 80's cars and that's true right right up to today.
IMO if you take 1975 to 1985, that's were the big change is most apparent, with nothing much new before 1975 and nothing much new since 1985 either (yes, there will be numerous separate innovations and exceptions that you can point to, but I mean in general).
A typical 1975 car was (styling apart) the same as a typical 1965 car, and a 1955 car, and a 1945 car, going right back to pre war cars. Basically a wheezing asthmatic four pot, in line, 4 speed, rear drive, cart sprung etc. Slow, grey porridge, abysmal handling, relatively unsophisticated. Think Morris Marina, Vauxhall Viva.
A typical 1985 car is transverse, front drive, 5 speed, with multi valve, EFi and ABS starting to appear, even 4WD, sophisticated front and rear suspension, generally much higher performance and handling. Think Austin Montego, Vauxhall Astra.
Mid to late seventies, the pre war reproduction antiques that we'd been driving for decades started to disappear and into the eighties were replaced with the sort of cars that we drive now.
There were exceptions pre 1975, the Citroen DS, NSU RO80, Mini, even the Austin Maxi and Renault 16, cars that were ahead of their time in terms of format. And since 1985 we've seen big strides in vehicle safety and equipment, electronics etc. but nothing like the big change of '75-'85 where we went from pre-war to the cars of today in just one decade.
MKI Fiesta (1976), MKI Golf (1975), these are the cars of today, and they've been around for forty years, arguing that a 90's Fiesta or Golf is better than an 80's version or even the latest 2017 version is missing the point, they are the same.
All IMHO
IMO if you take 1975 to 1985, that's were the big change is most apparent, with nothing much new before 1975 and nothing much new since 1985 either (yes, there will be numerous separate innovations and exceptions that you can point to, but I mean in general).
A typical 1975 car was (styling apart) the same as a typical 1965 car, and a 1955 car, and a 1945 car, going right back to pre war cars. Basically a wheezing asthmatic four pot, in line, 4 speed, rear drive, cart sprung etc. Slow, grey porridge, abysmal handling, relatively unsophisticated. Think Morris Marina, Vauxhall Viva.
A typical 1985 car is transverse, front drive, 5 speed, with multi valve, EFi and ABS starting to appear, even 4WD, sophisticated front and rear suspension, generally much higher performance and handling. Think Austin Montego, Vauxhall Astra.
Mid to late seventies, the pre war reproduction antiques that we'd been driving for decades started to disappear and into the eighties were replaced with the sort of cars that we drive now.
There were exceptions pre 1975, the Citroen DS, NSU RO80, Mini, even the Austin Maxi and Renault 16, cars that were ahead of their time in terms of format. And since 1985 we've seen big strides in vehicle safety and equipment, electronics etc. but nothing like the big change of '75-'85 where we went from pre-war to the cars of today in just one decade.
MKI Fiesta (1976), MKI Golf (1975), these are the cars of today, and they've been around for forty years, arguing that a 90's Fiesta or Golf is better than an 80's version or even the latest 2017 version is missing the point, they are the same.
All IMHO
TooMany2cvs said:
I didn't know that - how did that fit with the Jaguar -> Ford, BAe, BMW, LR -> Ford timeline?
No idea, I don't have the detail, I just remember reading about it in the motoring media of the time, and it was in the Ford proposal rationale. ARG had lean burn technology from the late eighties, sometime before K series, and it was supposed to be the mutts, years before it was needed for Euro 1 emissions legislation and cats. Ford quite fancied it at the time and I guess it was hangover from there. It must have been the first time it was for sale, BAe, rather than the second, BMW.Edited by Balmoral on Thursday 9th March 09:51
Car_Nut said:
Kitchski said:
MarshPhantom said:
Some of my own - Citroen BX16V, ZX16V, 1.7 Puma.
BX 16v was very much a car of the 80's, to be fair But I also think the 90's was a good era. The noughties has been easily worse! That said, I think the 50's were a good era too. The Mini, the DS, the D-Type - there was heaps of clever stuff in the 50's.
Also, to me the decade is defined by the cars that were released in that decade. They're cars of the time. I've got a Hillman Imp and a TVR S1 among other cars, but just because you see them pottering around Hampshire, doesn't mean they're a car of the time. Well, you won't see the Imp because it's broken.....
I can see where you're trying to draw your logic from, but I think you're on the wrong tracks
Escort Si-130 said:
Mr2Mike said:
The Mk2 Golf was so much better than the Escort is almost every area (except perhaps price) that they hardly bear comparison.
Maybe the drive of it, other than that the mk2 Golf was primitive. Sitting inside it was comparative of a commercial vehicle of the same era. The mk3 Golf was much better imo.I have to say for a car everyone agrees was an utter 'turd', i've never seen so many comments or feedback generated on a Shed feature for some time.....
It is perhaps not a surprise most fleets and indeed private owners started to buy german 'premium' brands around this time and perhaps not coincidentally why the premium brands started production of smaller hatch sized cars, which effectively changed the car buying scene to a majority of 'premium' marketed products we see today.
It is perhaps not a surprise most fleets and indeed private owners started to buy german 'premium' brands around this time and perhaps not coincidentally why the premium brands started production of smaller hatch sized cars, which effectively changed the car buying scene to a majority of 'premium' marketed products we see today.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff