RE: 942-mile Ford Capri 280 Brooklands for sale
Discussion
keljimstock said:
Silly money for a very ordinary car. I have nothing further to ad.
It's par for the course for the more popular classic cars, especially those with very low mileage mileage such as this. You can't really make sence of the prices in automotive hardware for the dosh terms, nostaligia is a major factor in determining price
slider2 said:
Stupidly long bonnet.
I've always been into the long bonnet look on cars generally. I can justify it to myself on the V6 Capri's as at least its a fairly sizeable lump. I remember the Capri 1.3 Laser back in the day though, rocking the wheezy 8V single carb, and thought the long bonnet didn't quite work with that.cerb4.5lee said:
Mr Tidy said:
But my mate's XR4i felt every bit as quick as my Capri!
My uncle had a XR4i and I used to love driving it big time. 
Remember reading it several times before deciding which to try/buy!
Edited by s m on Wednesday 28th October 09:25
cerb4.5lee said:
Mr Tidy said:
I think it was supposed to be related to the exhaust installation (I did like having a tail-pipe each side, especially on a cold morning). 
When I was growing up that was everything to me for sure, and I loved seeing a Capri do that! 
Gixer968CS said:
These things look so tiny now when you see them in the flesh. My best mates dad had a 2.8i in 1983 and it seemed sooo cool at the time, but I never thought of it as small. Cars have grown and perceptions change. Still love it though (although I prefer the earlier pepper pot look).
P.S. Mate's dad bought the 2.8i after selling an Oselli tuned 3.0S ....
Oselli 230S?P.S. Mate's dad bought the 2.8i after selling an Oselli tuned 3.0S ....
s m said:
cerb4.5lee said:
Mr Tidy said:
But my mate's XR4i felt every bit as quick as my Capri!
My uncle had a XR4i and I used to love driving it big time. Remember reading it several times before deciding which to try/buy!
Edited by s m on Wednesday 28th October 09:25
blade7 said:
I had 4 and 5 speed versions, the early car did seem to rev out easier in 4th gear. It wouldn't surprise me if Ford changed something and kept quiet about it on the later engines. The 5 speed gearbox was weaker too.
The four speed box was a carryover from the 3.0 and as such indestructible.The five speed box was a lightly modified 1.6 / 2.0 box with lousy ratios that wasn't.
s m said:
Oselli 230S?
The 3.0 block I took to Oselli was built up to a similar spec. Though my BV heads were ported by Nick Waples, so were probably better. I wasn't that impressed by the 4 barrel Holly conversion, it wasn't much better than a Weber 40DF15. It did rev to 7k fairly easily though. But the injection turbo made boost and pulled from around 2k revs, and although it only revved to 6k it continued to accelerate well into 5th gear.cologne2792 said:
The four speed box was a carryover from the 3.0 and as such indestructible.
The five speed box was a lightly modified 1.6 / 2.0 box with lousy ratios that wasn't.
If I remember correctly the layshaft/bearings were uprated for the 85 Injection special. The first gearbox in my turbo went bang, but the new late gearbox that replaced it was fine. You could buy a Turbo Technics converted injection special through Ford dealers, so Ford must have been confident the gearbox could handle the torque.The five speed box was a lightly modified 1.6 / 2.0 box with lousy ratios that wasn't.
varsas said:
Synopsis said:
A Capri with fewer than 10,000 miles would be notable; one with *less than 1,000 miles must be unheard of
It should be 'fewer', you had it right the first time. If you didn't want to re use the 'fewer than' phrase again 'under' would have been acceptable.Edited by varsas on Friday 23 October 12:47
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff