Cars which aren't as bad as they're made out to be...
Discussion
s m said:
Alfanatic said:
I've driven a few Opels and Vauxhalls, and in general they have all been great engines in attractive bodies, with handling that was usually safe but was consistently miserable. In this case I don't think Clarkson was exaggerating.
I thought the Manta I had was a very nice handling car. The CIH engine wasn't a stormer like the XE but I'd describe the handling as much better than miserablePersonal opinion for sure, I know a fair few people who are as enthusiastic about driving as I am but got on very well with the cars I hated.
I'll also happily admit I've always wanted a go in an Opel GT too. Lovely looking car that only needs to be half as good to drive as it looks to win me over. Rare car though so I'd think my chances are slim
Similarly, the Mk2 Astra GTE 16v I had - always wanted one as a friend had one new. His seemed pretty good but 10 years after they were new, general opinion was they were a bit poor. Decent tyres and a good alignment meant it was a pleasant surprise and the same car that did well in the Autocar triple test and Car mag comparison with the Golf Gti. Truly the Focus RS mk1 of its day
Baryonyx said:
I've always thought the MG TF was okay, in the right colour. Though the interior is disastrously cheap and the MX5's at the price range were better to drive. Still, it does provide that mid-engined experience, which is nice, though done much better by an MR2 at a similar price.
My TF handles far better than my 1990 MR2 MK2; I can't comment on the MK3. The interior is a peculiar mix of expensive feeling bits and packaging-quality plastics while the driving position's too high but on the whole it's really good little car. What MG didn't skimp on was the braking system. Perfectly weighted and extremely powerful the ABS only kicks in when it's absolutely necessary. At least on the optional uprated system...My Leyland Princess 2200HL really has to count as an underrated car. Only one breakdown (a light switch) and unmatched comfort; it's almost like being in bed. Then there's that six cylinder engine. Didn't rot like a typical 70's car either, even if all the paint dropped off.
I owned three early shape Vectra's (the 'B'). I really liked mine. The 1.8 never gave me any trouble at all in 40k miles and I then replaced it with a 2.6 GSi estate which if I am honest I loved. The engine was a peach, smooth and torquey. I also liked the rarity factor, it looked great in my opinion with the GSi bumper and I only saw a handful of other GSi's in the couple of years I owned it.
I'd have another.
I'd have another.
Rover metro - I had a 1.1 k series and it went and handled better than you would think. Felt faster than it was and could keep up with plenty of "better" metal on a back road blast.
Ive had a few k series engined motors and have to say ive always been really impressed by them.
Also whoever mentioned the mondeo - had a mk1 and it was one of the best cars ive owned (maybe thats not saying much!)
Ive had a few k series engined motors and have to say ive always been really impressed by them.
Also whoever mentioned the mondeo - had a mk1 and it was one of the best cars ive owned (maybe thats not saying much!)
Justmike said:
Also whoever mentioned the mondeo - had a mk1 and it was one of the best cars ive owned (maybe thats not saying much!)
I had a mk1 as well, it was the first car i bought (i'd been bought a Fiesta 1.1 after i passed my test), 1.8 GLX in blue. Fantastic thing. I did nearly 40,000 miles in it (and it had 90k on it when i got it) and aside from replacing an indicator bulb, it was 100% trouble free.markmullen said:
3000GT. Accept that it is never going to be the nimblest back road scorcher with that weight and for the money it makes a lot of sense.
Exactly what I was thinking when I clicked on the thread.Also - all FWD cars if you take the opinion of many on here. Yes, I can 'feel' the difference, and it's not for me but for commuting/driving to the shops it's absolutely fine.
Ford Escort Mk4; ours has been pretty much bulletproof, only thing of note that's needed replacing has been a water pump which was dirt cheap anyway Very comfortable, economical (40-45 mpg without really trying, could probably get high 40's if I was a bit easier on the throttle and stuck to 60odd on the M-way). I'd imagine an RS Turbo with well-sorted suspension & tyres would be a hoot, you know where the car is in a way you just don't seem to get with modern stuff (not sure if that makes sense ).
vit4 said:
Ford Escort Mk4; ours has been pretty much bulletproof, only thing of note that's needed replacing has been a water pump which was dirt cheap anyway Very comfortable, economical (40-45 mpg without really trying, could probably get high 40's if I was a bit easier on the throttle and stuck to 60odd on the M-way). I'd imagine an RS Turbo with well-sorted suspension & tyres would be a hoot, you know where the car is in a way you just don't seem to get with modern stuff (not sure if that makes sense ).
I had a 200bhp RS turbo and it was indeed a hoot. Not very fast round corners even with "decent" suspension but the lack of powersteering, tremendous torque steer and a great '80's essex vibe (mine was white ) made me enjoy mine. Best thing was the old school turbo boost. Foot to the floor and nothing, nothing, nothing, BOOST, wheelspin, repeat with next gear. In fact im off to ebay...Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff