RE: Vauxhall Cavalier time capsule for sale

[Davie]

Deranged Rover said:

My first car was a B reg Nova - although it was a garage special edition, it was based on a Merit and I can confirm it actually had a 2 speed fan!

Fortunately mine had the more modern OHC 1.2 engine with a terrifying 55bhp, so I went everywhere sideways in a cloud of uncontrollable tyre smoke...

I'm clearly bored whilst at work but a 1.2 Nova had a power to weight ratio of about 72bhp/ton, the equivalent modern day Corsa 1.2 16v has a power to weight ratio of 68bhp/ton... and I would happily stand and proclaim that the Nova would likely feel like a rocket ship in comparison! 60mph in a basic Nova on tiny 13" tyres, you'd know all about it!

I often wonder how people would view things from the dark and distant past, for example if you gave your average 20 something who runs about in a 2020's Vauxhall 1.2 Corsa the keys to a B reg Nova Merit, what would they think? But that applies to lots of things in life, if the items is "of your generation" then you view it very differently looking back.

I suppose it's no different for a 20 something to look back on this with an element of disdain and even without any personal experience, immediately deem it to be crap in comparison... but I'm probably guilty of similar when I look at cars from the 70's, in my head they just seem prehistoric compared to cars of my era. Though as a car guy, I wouldn't just proclaim "that's crap" with no weight behind it.

I think we forget all too easily as modern features take over. Prime example, that old V70 I bought... my little boy (7) went out to get his scooter out the back, He returned two minutes later saying he couldn't open it as there's no buttons. He's right, you put the key in the lock and turn it - this was alien to him. The fact it was alien to him, was equally alien to me.

[Jon_S_Rally]

Earthdweller said:

I had a 1.1 Punto 55s .. it was a great car,like a tardis inside

I don't recall it being "dog slow" though sure it wasn't the quickest thing. My wife used it to commute round the M25 and I drove it several times from London to Lancashire and back

It was perfectly good

I'd imagine the number plate it had would be worth a few quid now but back then never gave it a thought .. M911CLM it was

We replaced it with another Punto the 85SX and that had a sunroof

Sorry, I meant dog slow relative to a lot of stuff today. At the time, it was normal, because most other cars were similar in performance.

I think now that almost everything is turbocharged, and we've got much more used to having "better" cars on finance/lease, a lot of people have forgotten what cars were like a couple of decades ago.

[Earthdweller]

Jon_S_Rally said:

Earthdweller said:

I had a 1.1 Punto 55s .. it was a great car,like a tardis inside

I don't recall it being "dog slow" though sure it wasn't the quickest thing. My wife used it to commute round the M25 and I drove it several times from London to Lancashire and back

It was perfectly good

I'd imagine the number plate it had would be worth a few quid now but back then never gave it a thought .. M911CLM it was

We replaced it with another Punto the 85SX and that had a sunroof

Sorry, I meant dog slow relative to a lot of stuff today. At the time, it was normal, because most other cars were similar in performance.

I think now that almost everything is turbocharged, and we've got much more used to having "better" cars on finance/lease, a lot of people have forgotten what cars were like a couple of decades ago.

Ha yes, my first car was a Morris Minor that k don't think would do 60 ...

We certainly don't need cars that do 0-60 in 3s as the norm

Going back to the 90's/00's I think they were the golden age of driving

Cars were (relatively) affordable and driving was enjoyable and fun

There was no worrying about speed cameras or ANPR or scamera vans ... or parking eye etc etc

Cars might not have been as fast for sure but you were able to drive them faster than you can drive todays "fast" cars and classic/interesting cars could be bought for relative peanuts compared with today

Good times to be a car guy for sure

[Deranged Rover]

Davie said:

I often wonder how people would view things from the dark and distant past, for example if you gave your average 20 something who runs about in a 2020's Vauxhall 1.2 Corsa the keys to a B reg Nova Merit, what would they think? But that applies to lots of things in life, if the items is "of your generation" then you view it very differently looking back.

It's very true and I reckon that, given my Nova had a manual choke, the average 20-something driver wouldn't even be able to get it to start if it was cold outside!

[cerb4.5lee]

Davie said:

I think we forget all too easily as modern features take over. Prime example, that old V70 I bought... my little boy (7) went out to get his scooter out the back, He returned two minutes later saying he couldn't open it as there's no buttons. He's right, you put the key in the lock and turn it - this was alien to him. The fact it was alien to him, was equally alien to me.

Similar happened to me the other week when I hired a VW Tiguan(a 2022 model). It opened on the key fob, but then I spent ages looking for the start/stop button, because that is what I'm used to now(the GLE400d/370Z/F82 M4 all have start/stop buttons for example).

Then I noticed a actual key slot and the ignition, so then I realised that I had to press a button on the keyfob to flick the key out. I did feel like a right pratt for a few seconds though! VW are definitely very old school with that I think.

[AC43]

cerb4.5lee said:

Davie said:

I think we forget all too easily as modern features take over. Prime example, that old V70 I bought... my little boy (7) went out to get his scooter out the back, He returned two minutes later saying he couldn't open it as there's no buttons. He's right, you put the key in the lock and turn it - this was alien to him. The fact it was alien to him, was equally alien to me.

Similar happened to me the other week when I hired a VW Tiguan(a 2022 model). It opened on the key fob, but then I spent ages looking for the start/stop button, because that is what I'm used to now(the GLE400d/370Z/F82 M4 all have start/stop buttons for example).

Then I noticed a actual key slot and the ignition, so then I realised that I had to press a button on the keyfob to flick the key out. I did feel like a right pratt for a few seconds though! VW are definitely very old school with that I think.

When I first drove my first C43 to work I parked it outside the office and spent ages trying to get the key out of the barrel - a mate wandered over and asked what I was doing. He suggested I put the gear selector in "P"......doh.

[TheDoggingFather]

Mr Tidy said:

Davie said:

M4cruiser said:

Strange to have a Fiesta thread buried in a Cavalier one!

It's sort of relevant, sort of... when you think we were running about in 50bhp Fiestas around the time of the MK3 Cavaliers, makes you realise the V6 with 170bhp and the 204bhp Turbo must have been quite a step. Four times the power so could be like saying 120bhp hatchback today compared to something with 450bhp.

A friend has a B plate Nova Merit. Absolute poverty spec in white with a brown interior. No NS door mirror, 3spd (?) fan, 4spd gearbox, don't think it came with a radio... or rear seat belts. Just checked and the 1.0 had 45bhp, though was only 725kg but even still. Makes you realise why dropping a 2.0 16v into a Nova was mind boggling back then. Or a 2.0 turbo!

One poster was correct in saying things felt faster back then as cars were lighter,smaller, less insulating... I can confirm that a 16v Nova felt like a very quick car and a turbo one, that was just madness back then. Still is now!

Sort of relevant I suppose. In 1984 I bought my first 2.8i Capri with 160 bhp which was much quicker than most cars in the 80s.

But my employer bought an economy special 1.1 litre push-rod MK3 Escort in 1983 in poverty spec. Vinyl seats, rubber mats on the floor, no rear wiper, no HRW, no N/S door mirror and amber and red "Economy" lights you had to ignore to get up any sort of incline. It was a hateful POS!

Early MK2 1.6 Cavaliers did have 90bhp and went pretty well for the 80s (Girlfriends dad had one), but MK3 1.6s did only have 82bhp because they were tuned for unleaded that was lower RON.

That might be why my 1990 1.8L came about. It ran on unleaded but had 90bhp.

Now my brain is telling me that Vauxhall's of the early 90s had a little lever to switch between 95 Ron and 97+ Ron, I could be becoming deluded in my dotage, but it feels like a very strong memory.

I saw someone mentioning the Fiat Punto 55,a friend at work had one, I thought it was borderline dangerously slow. Made my 40bhp Mini 1000 feel like a rocket ship.

[MC Bodge]

Mr Tidy said:

Early MK2 1.6 Cavaliers did have 90bhp and went pretty well for the 80s (Girlfriends dad had one), but MK3 1.6s did only have 82bhp because they were tuned for unleaded that was lower RON.

The MK3 1.6 we had was very slow, even for 82bhp.

As a rough equivalent, and probably not that different in weight, the Mk5 (2006) Fiesta 1.4 we had with 80bhp was probably quite a bit faster than the Mk3 Cavalier (although the Cavalier may have had a higher top speed due to less aerodynamic drag?)

[M.F.D]

Came expecting an SRI or Turbo and severely disappointed.

[B'stard Child]

TheDoggingFather said:

Mr Tidy said:

Davie said:

M4cruiser said:

Strange to have a Fiesta thread buried in a Cavalier one!

It's sort of relevant, sort of... when you think we were running about in 50bhp Fiestas around the time of the MK3 Cavaliers, makes you realise the V6 with 170bhp and the 204bhp Turbo must have been quite a step. Four times the power so could be like saying 120bhp hatchback today compared to something with 450bhp.

A friend has a B plate Nova Merit. Absolute poverty spec in white with a brown interior. No NS door mirror, 3spd (?) fan, 4spd gearbox, don't think it came with a radio... or rear seat belts. Just checked and the 1.0 had 45bhp, though was only 725kg but even still. Makes you realise why dropping a 2.0 16v into a Nova was mind boggling back then. Or a 2.0 turbo!

One poster was correct in saying things felt faster back then as cars were lighter,smaller, less insulating... I can confirm that a 16v Nova felt like a very quick car and a turbo one, that was just madness back then. Still is now!

Sort of relevant I suppose. In 1984 I bought my first 2.8i Capri with 160 bhp which was much quicker than most cars in the 80s.

But my employer bought an economy special 1.1 litre push-rod MK3 Escort in 1983 in poverty spec. Vinyl seats, rubber mats on the floor, no rear wiper, no HRW, no N/S door mirror and amber and red "Economy" lights you had to ignore to get up any sort of incline. It was a hateful POS!

Early MK2 1.6 Cavaliers did have 90bhp and went pretty well for the 80s (Girlfriends dad had one), but MK3 1.6s did only have 82bhp because they were tuned for unleaded that was lower RON.

That might be why my 1990 1.8L came about. It ran on unleaded but had 90bhp.

Now my brain is telling me that Vauxhall's of the early 90s had a little lever to switch between 95 Ron and 97+ Ron, I could be becoming deluded in my dotage, but it feels like a very strong memory.

It was called an octane plug - one side said 95 the other 98 and the plug could be swapped in the socket depending on what fuel you were running - normally found in the back of the engine bay

It was basically a timing adjustment to advance the ignition for better fuel and retard it for poorer fuel but it worked quite well

[ScoobyChris]

MC Bodge said:

The MK3 1.6 we had was very slow, even for 82bhp.

As a rough equivalent, and probably not that different in weight, the Mk5 (2006) Fiesta 1.4 we had with 80bhp was probably quite a bit faster than the Mk3 Cavalier (although the Cavalier may have had a higher top speed due to less aerodynamic drag?)

If the Cavalier is designed as a motorway cruiser, chances are it had taller gearing too which may have blunted performance?

Chris

[MC Bodge]

ScoobyChris said:

MC Bodge said:

The MK3 1.6 we had was very slow, even for 82bhp.

As a rough equivalent, and probably not that different in weight, the Mk5 (2006) Fiesta 1.4 we had with 80bhp was probably quite a bit faster than the Mk3 Cavalier (although the Cavalier may have had a higher top speed due to less aerodynamic drag?)

If the Cavalier is designed as a motorway cruiser, chances are it had taller gearing too which may have blunted performance?

Chris

We are talking about 3 decades ago now, but the Cavalier did 30mph in 1st and 50mph in second. The Fiesta was similar. Cars are typically much longer geared now.

[Evil.soup]

cerb4.5lee said:

Evil.soup said:

cerb4.5lee said:

Evil.soup said:

Having owned one of these G reg 1.6L in hatchback form when I was 18, I have to say, I would quite like to get behind the wheel of one again.

I went from a Lada Riva 1.3 Estate to the Cavalier, so it felt like a light weight rocket ship in comparison. I bought it in 1995 with over 120,000 miles on the clock for £2700, stretched my budget back then for this lol!

I can't say it was perfect, but it was quicker than a friends Astra of the same generation and I found the handling to be pretty decent, but following a Russian brick, I guess it would feel pretty decent.

Mine was in burgundy and under the yellow street lights of the day, one of the doors was a completely different colour to the rest, so it had been in the wars. In daylight, it was an identical colour match, which the geek in me found fascinating!

I can't say it was reliable for me though with this mileage on it. 2 possibly 3 times I had plastic hose connectors split or snap, so I became a dab hand at on the go repairs. Once, returning from a long trip to a theme park, the clutch cable snapped, so that was a very long tow home and a fiddly job to fix. It was the first car I ever serviced or took any real care of, I loved it and learned a lot from owning it.

Would I pay 6k for this? Probably not, but I wouldn't mind a nostalgic test drive in it...

You're bringing memories back for me there. I remember paying £3300 for my XR4x4 back in 1994, and it felt like real step up after the Metro 1275 Sport that proceeded it at the time. I had 3 clutch cables snap in the XR4x4 too!

I loved the XR4x4, a friends father had one and allowed him to use it, I was always amazed when I saw him drive it, couldn't believe he was given the keys voluntarily!!
I went Ford following the Cavalier, wanted a Fiesta RS Turbo, but good ones were hens teeth, so I ended up with a mint XR2i, loved that thing!

I loved them too, and I had a couple of them, both 2.9's. Funnily enough it was actually the Fiesta RS Turbo that I would have preferred though, but I couldn't afford the insurance on one at the time sadly.

One of my mates had an XR2i, and I always enjoyed driving it.

I remember insurance for the RS being about £100 more than the XR, so I would have if I could have found a good one in my budget, but they were rare in the first place and a good one in the same shape as the XR I found was significantly more money. Shame I never scratched the RS itch back then.

[GeniusOfLove]

Earthdweller said:

Jon_S_Rally said:

It wasn't just Ford in fairness. There were loads of cars around with tiny engines and miniscule outputs. In fact, I'd say it was the norm. I remember my friend's parents buying a Fiat Punto in about 1996, and that only had 55bhp and was dog slow. Speaking of Fiat, the Cinquecento was sold with a 900cc engine with about 40bhp. Another friend had a 1.2 8-valve Corsa B as his first car, which I think had 45bhp.

I had a 1.1 Punto 55s .. it was a great car,like a tardis inside

I don't recall it being "dog slow" though sure it wasn't the quickest thing. My wife used it to commute round the M25 and I drove it several times from London to Lancashire and back

It was perfectly good

I'd imagine the number plate it had would be worth a few quid now but back then never gave it a thought .. M911CLM it was

We replaced it with another Punto the 85SX and that had a sunroof

A 1.1 Mk2 Fiesta or even an earlier Mk3 was fine. No ball of fire, but fine, as were most 1.1 supermini type cars, but those later Mk3 Fiestas with that hopeless old engine wheezing through a catalytic converter were really terribly sluggish and not at all like a 1.1 Mk2 which was perfectly decent.

[s m]

Forester1965 said:

Good luck getting to 150mph with something the size and shape of a Cavalier and 170bhp. I bet they felt comparatively quick with the extra torque over the smaller engined cooking models. In reality they weren't that quick at all.

I did think it would probably depend what your yardstick was as to whether you thought it was quick or not for an ordinarily looking saloon


Friend’s cheap ex-lease car was pretty much identical to this below - no alloys and quite basic inside so probably a bit lighter than the CDX tested below



I had a quick google as to the proper timings mags recorded at the time for a manual Cavalier V6. These were generally done at Millbrook and the testers usually reckoned you could add 2 or 3 mph onto the max speed on the bowl to compensate for tyre scrub

Autocar’s times were as below



CAR magazine recorded very similar ( slightly higher top speed )
as mentioned - different test car to Autocar so you’d think it was typical for a V6 manual



I can remember it being long-geared though ( over a ton real speed in 3rd according to Autocar test ) to suit the motorway and fast B-roads but it really used to pull hard in 3rd and 4th as I recall.

Was that a quick saloon in the early/mid 90s? 145-ish mph ?

Well the E36 328i was just about to arrive early 95 so the E36 325 was pitted against the Golf VR6 just about the end of 91. Personally I think my circle of friends would have thought both of those respectably quick cars at that time - we weren’t running 911s or E36 M3s, more like the older 944s, 80s RS cars or E30 M-cars were what we could stretch to



For a Cavalier to be close to those times on a quoted 168bhp was quick - they were certainly healthy sized no matter what skullduggery people will claim for the test cars and not the last word in ultimate handling I’d agree.

As ever, YMMV of course


As to this 1.6 under the spotlight, it’s not for me personally. I like the fact it has survived though

[Forester1965]

Being lighter wouldn't add to top speed.

[Nyloc20]

The happy days of fully expensed company cars! I was 37 when I got my first one, a 1986 Cavalier LX. I’d had some interesting sporty motors previously but they were all a few years old when I bought them. The freedom to drive all over the country ( and a few Eurocamp holidays in Europe) without the stress of breaking down was amazing. It was a good reliable motor, I took it to around 110k miles then it got changed for an Orion Ghia Injection at the end of the lease, that was brilliant.

[Twolane]

The Cav V6 had a rather hefty flywheel, 15 kgs or so ,this probably added to the feeling of lazy pick up as well as the long gearing.
One of the mods I did to mine was to fit a Courtenay sport lightweight version, saved around 9kgs IIRC.

[s m]

Forester1965 said:

Being lighter wouldn't add to top speed.

Correct, but it might account for it posting slightly better acceleration times than the heavier versions