Scorpio for spanking up the motorway?

[ShiteRider]

As per title, i'm going to be starting a new job in blackburn so my current cortina friendly daily commute of a 20 mile round trip on A and B roads will change to a 50+ mile round trip on the motorway.

I've done the run a few times already, beige 1600 was hopeless ( it's happy at a steady 50-55 but definately no more) and the soon to be departed black 2.0l although happy at 70-80, was only returning 23-ish mpg.

So i've got a grand to spend and was thinking 1.8 focus as the sensible option............ but my inbuilt shite meter is demandng a 2.0/2.3 scorpio. There are reasons for this, in a perverse way i like the way they look,it's ford, it's rear wheel drive, it's ugly as fuck so values are quite low, and i've run twin cam sierra's in the past (this engines predecessor) and found them to be reliable torquey economical motors.

Am i batshit crazy? i've never driven one of these for any time on the road but have worked on them and found them comfy, well equipped cars, that are reasonably rust resistant.

Who has experience of these as dailys, what should i be looking for? is one model better than another eg; 2.0 over 2.3 or viceversa, like wise manual over auto (i've no real preference, though i thnk autos will be more common) and what are they like for juice (i'd be happy with 30+mpg)

Bombard me with info people!.......bombard me!

Rob.

P.S i mean the the fugly frogeye model, not the fat sierra one.

[whitevanman]

From having had both...go for the 2.0 it was the more economical for some reason

[dollywobbler]

I bet you'll get a clear run up the motorway. People will glance in their rear view mirror and recoil in horror, moving over to let the 'hideously ugly thing' past. Probably.

[ShiteRider]

You talking about me or the car?

[Pillock]

I love 'em. I've heard tales of the 2.0 being the better engine too, but for reliability reasons. Not had either though so feel free to chalk that up to "armchair ownership". Get an Ultima and waft everywhere, it's not like you're going to lose any money since they're all at the bottom of the curve now.

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

I had the 2.3 and, while it was fine for cruising, you did have to shift down to fourth if you needed any acceleration. OTOH, it was very frugal (can't really give figures though, as I was running on LPG).

 

The wheelarches are the only real weak spot when it comes to rust. Also make sure that the plastic battery cover is present and the general area reasonably dry- if not, expect all sorts of electrical fun. Most estates and a few saloons have self-levelling rear suspension- the proper shock absorbers are shock-ingly expensive, but you can also replace them with conventional ones.

 

They're a marvellous car, extremely well-built- I'd say build quality was noticeably better than on my old E38 (and there hadn't been anything wrong with the beemer, either!). I was really gutted when I had to scrap mine (courtesy of a crash), and I can certainly see myself getting another one in the future, particularly when they get into classic insurance territory.

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

Having said all of the above, if I had a grand to spend on a commuting 'barge, I wouldn't confine myself to a particular model. I'd be looking to find something with LPG and a bit of history. e.g.

 

http://www.gumtree.com/p/cars-vans-moto ... 1002499492

[ShiteRider]

I had the 2.3 and, while it was fine for cruising, you did have to shift down to fourth if you needed any acceleration. OTOH, it was very frugal.

 

The wheelarches are the only real weak spot when it comes to rust. Also make sure that the plastic battery cover is present and the general area reasonably dry- if not, expect all sorts of electrical fun. Most estates and a few saloons have self-levelling rear suspension- the proper shock absorbers are shock-ingly expensive, but you can also replace them with conventional ones.

 

They're a marvellous car, extremely well-built- I'd say build quality was noticeably better than on my old E38 (and there hadn't been anything wrong with the beemer, either!). I was really gutted when I had to scrap mine (courtesy of a crash), and I can certainly see myself getting another one in the future, particularly when they get into classic insurance territory.

I agree about the build quality, i've found them to be one of the best screwed together fords for a long time. Rusy wheelarchs aren't really an issue for me (i'm a panel beater by trade).

They seem like the perfect solution, as i was seriously considering a rover 75 (my mate has a diesel, and it was a hell of a lot of car for pocket money) as i want something i can just jump in and float about in but with the scorpio being ford and having the power going to the right wheels it kinda seems right.

[ShiteRider]

Having said all of the above, if I had a grand to spend on a commuting 'barge, I wouldn't confine myself to a particular model. I'd be looking to find something with LPG and a bit of history. e.g.

 

http://www.gumtree.com/p/cars-vans-moto ... 1002499492

Not entirely sure about LPG as i have no experience of it, but it would be the sensible thing to consider.

I did have a 4.0 sovereign when i was 19 (sans insurance ) and it was incredibaly soothing to drive, though also very thirsty and that was when the idea of petrol going over a pound a little was unthinkable!

My priorities are something reasonably reliable/easy enough to get bits for and fix, 30+mpg or equlivent in lpg terms, comfortable for spanking up the motorway/sitting in rush hour................i'd also like Kelly brook covered in chocolate, the moon on a stick, yadda yadda.

[Pete-M]

I had a 2.9 24v Scorpio Ultima for a while. Liked it, and it'd do 30-32 mpg at 80.

 

2.0 is a bit gutless, 2.3 about the best compromise.

[monzaE]

I've owned a 24v Ultima for the last couple of years.

Good owners website - forum

http://www.fordscorpio.co.uk/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.pl

 

Ford Scorpio Ultima 1997 by Lazenby43, on Flickr

[dollywobbler]

I think I'd choose one ahead of a Rover 75. I really like the 75 but they can be complex and irritating in the ways of clutches. The Scorpio harks from an older generation and is probably all the better for that.

[autofive]

2.0 is a bit gutless

 

+1

 

motorway cruising is what the granny was designed for, but not with a 4-pot.

 

also, with winter fast approaching; at 6am this morning, with a heavy frost, iced windows and outside temp. of -2, my granada took about 3 minutes with the heater on to clear all the windows and make the interior warm enough. I have noticed many smaller cars have crap heaters, they may get warm but that takes 20 minutes.

[Lacquer Peel]

The VM diesel is good in these.

I don't think they're ugly by the standards of new cars.

[Stixy]

I used to break these and ive had quite a few of them and found Reliability wise the 2.0 & 2.3 are poor

 

both suffer from disintergrating engine looms and coilpacks the 2.3 has a plastic inlet manifold which is prone to cracking behind the thermostat housing and letting all the coolant out and both the the 2.0 and 2.3 crack exhaust manifolds and they can be a pig to change as it involves droping the cat down to do it .also the electronicly controld Autoboxes can work fine one minute an not at all the next . Comfort wise though there fantastic and economy from the 2.0 is great when there running right , the 2.3 is not as good ive never had more than 33 mpg from a 2.3 . Rotwise they can be bad sills arches and rear support pannel behind the bumper are the first to go but also check the floor as well especialy round the seat mounts . as mentioned above battery covers are essential . Resale wise they are hard to shift the last one i sold was a realy good one an early 2.0 but it took 6 mnths to sell it

 

There not in the same league as the Sierra twin cam for build or reliability

 

If you do buy one i still have spare bumpers but my honest opinion is there are more reliable ways to waste your money