Jump to content

eBay tat volume 3.


Recommended Posts

Posted
Posted

^^ And its just had a quick wash at a pez station car wash, who still uses those nowadays??

Posted

Nice Cygnet model name on that 309 - I suppose they always were a bit of an ugly duckling in the Peugeot range......

 

Wow, I'm more controversial than Bernard Manning!

  • Like 1
Posted

Forget the senator, look at that corsair!

 

Nah, give me a shit Vauxhall over a Ford any day... ;-)

  • Like 2
Posted

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/FORD-ESCORT-MK4-1990-1-8-DIESEL-L-5-DOOR-HATCH-TRULY-AMAZING-CONDITION-/380949067906?pt=Automobiles_UK&hash=item58b2557882

 

$_57.JPG

 

Was the 1.8 any good?  My father had a 1.6D one of these as a stop-gap car in the late nineties, it was the noisiest, slowest and most agricultural engine I'd ever known in such a relatively modern car.  Amusingly smokey on cold mornings and dead reliable though.

Yes. still pretty slow, but usefully quicker than the 1.6 which really was a slug. it's basically the same engine.

Posted

Yeah, 1986 is so bad that mine has only managed 196,000 miles. (rear arm issues came later I think? Mine is on its original rear arms (and arm bearings!) and has no tyre shredding issues). They certainly do rot, but 1986 is probably better than a 1989.

 

Not sure what you're saying here - despite the shit material and assembly qualities yours is proving a 2cv is so fundamentally good it can survive this and live for almost 30 years because of it, or that I'm talking bollocks?

 

Plenty of '86 2cvs had rear arms (usually only one) toeing out significantly (though the problem did get worse as supplies of older ones were exhausted), the problem continued right to the end of production. Fit a set of arms from a 70s car and you can transform the way a 2cv handles, especially if it's on a Citroen chassis. They'll never handle properly on those galv ones which look like they were designed for a go-cart unless you brace them up. Sadly, I think a lot of rebuilt 2cv owners simply accept the jittery ride, poor roadholding and rapidly-rotting bodies as the stresses are transferred from chassis to body.

 

'86-on examples also had gearbox components made out of softer material so that reversing them could cause internal carnage, the engines sometimes suffered awful flat spots since carbs were no longer being set up individually, engines started suffering partial seizures even when set up correctly, due to tighter tolerances and lean running, chassis were known to fail the first MoT, steering wore out much more rapidly and so on. '87 and '88 were even worse, with tight diffs being akin to dragging your anchor, more engine seizures and continuing rot in 1970s Vauxhall and Alfa proportions.

 

Just like the W124, the 2cv was contantly having money cut from its production. Patchy quality down the years made these problems far worse for quite a lot of the cars, so that buying one is more like choosing vintage wine or fine art than a second-hand motor. But it was after the '85 model year (when there appeared to be an improvement in assembly) that things really went into freefall. The French weren't daft - they stopped buying them almost completely.

 

 

 

That could be a decent car - it's always good if there is an inline shot of the rear wheels on PSA stuff, is that OSR looking a little canted? Easier to do without steel suspension, though.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...