Jump to content

eBay tat volume 3.

Ross_K

By Ross_K
in AutoShite

 Share

Recommended Posts

meggersdog Rank: Renault 16

meggersdog

Posted
Posted
18 hours ago, wuvvum said:

There is an age beyond which you can get away with red indicators at the back (and white at the front) - I forget what age exactly, but I had a feeling it was older than Huggy.

1965

from the matters of testing blog 

American vehicles with red rear indicators, while not a common sight on British roads, are widespread enough that any tester not familiar with the requirements for direction indicators should be advised - there is no exemption for any vehicle to have red rear indicators if it was first used on or after 1 September 1965.

cort16 Rank: Matra Rancho towing a Tagora

cort16

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, paulplom said:

Looks like a 944/928 hybrid. Not even that quick. A standard t-5 would keep up.

It's got 240bhp, probably not bad for an n/a 3 litre 4 cylinder at the time. From what I've just read there was meant to be an S3 944 but Porsche being skint turned that into a new model with upgraded engine and suspension but still basically a next generation 944. 

The club sports seems to follow the recipe of remove equipment, increase price, double desirability that's served porsche pretty well before and since.

Hertz Rank: Lancia Gamma

Hertz

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, Austat said:

904478781_CRD226Y(3).jpg.d920107ab362808c179ff179c55717f9.jpg

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ford-cortina-1-6-GL/274352037530?_trkparms=aid%3D888008%26algo%3DDISC.CARDS%26ao%3D1%26asc%3D225076%26meid%3D3f79ca86dcab4f5db4f4f3bbb5d40229%26pid%3D100009%26rk%3D1%26rkt%3D1%26mehot%3Dpp%26sd%3D164158338466%26itm%3D274352037530%26pmt%3D0%26noa%3D1%26pg%3D2047675%26algv%3DDiscV1&_trksid=p2047675.c100009.m1982

spacer.png

 

Skizzer Rank: Isuzu Florian

Skizzer

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Sir Snipes said:

Hey that's nice. I do wonder if the 1.8T suits a Rover though. No doubt better than the NA, and probably better numbers than the 2.0, but maybe the 2.0 "feels" more Rover?

90527139_1087100831654167_24201462967120

Go V6 or go home, I say.

Other opinions are available of course: I’ve not actually tried a 1.8T or — shudder — one of those Diesel things.

cort16 Rank: Matra Rancho towing a Tagora

cort16

Posted
Posted

The 1.8t was just there as a tax dodge really Understandable at the time but not really desirable now. A 2.0 v6 is a bit of an oddity as I can’t think of many low capacity v6 since then .

Its probably like the bmw 520i straight sixes though they have the power of a 4 cylinder but  fuel consumption of a v8

Skizzer Rank: Isuzu Florian

Skizzer

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, cort16 said:

Its probably like the bmw 520i straight sixes though they have the power of a 4 cylinder but  fuel consumption of a v8

Ah, but they make the sound of a six.  Plus smooth trumps fast in my book.

Having owned both a Rover 75 2.0 and an M20B20-engined BMW, the consumption isn’t quite at V8 levels but you’re on the right lines.

 

Kiltox Rank: Matra Rancho towing a Tagora

Kiltox

Posted
Posted
25 minutes ago, Skizzer said:

Go V6 or go home, I say.

Other opinions are available of course: I’ve not actually tried a 1.8T or — shudder — one of those Diesel things.

I’d love to try a V6 75. The diesel left a lot to be desired!

cort16 Rank: Matra Rancho towing a Tagora

cort16

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, Skizzer said:

Ah, but they make the sound of a six.  Plus smooth trumps fast in my book.

Having owned both a Rover 75 2.0 and an M20B20-engined BMW, the consumption isn’t quite at V8 levels but you’re on the right lines.

 

I found all 6 cylinder BMW’s seem to pretty much use the same amount of fuel from a 520i to 530i

Snipes Rank: Lancia Gamma

Snipes

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Skizzer said:

Go V6 or go home, I say.

Other opinions are available of course: I’ve not actually tried a 1.8T or — shudder — one of those Diesel things.

I think a revvy turbo would work well in a ZT. Or even better a ZS or ZR.

I can't think of any 2.0 six that wasn't basically pointless. Mazda, Ford/Jaguar, Toyota/Lexus, BMW.....

EssDeeWon Rank: Renault 16

EssDeeWon

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, Skizzer said:

Go V6 or go home, I say.

Other opinions are available of course: I’ve not actually tried a 1.8T or — shudder — one of those Diesel things.

This, This and This.

I did go in a 1.8T once, very quick car.    I'd rather leave slightly earlier and enjoy the V6 waft.

wuvvum Rank: Matra Rancho towing a Tagora

wuvvum

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, Sir Snipes said:

 I do wonder if the 1.8T suits a Rover though. No doubt better than the NA, and probably better numbers than the 2.0, but maybe the 2.0 "feels" more Rover?

Personally I thought the 1.8T suited the 75 surprisingly well.  The 2.0 V6 sounds nicer, but you have to rev the knackers off it to get it to move, which is very uncouth.  The Turbokettle is a lot torquier.

Edit:  The obvious answer is to go for the 2.5 V6 - all the advantages of the 2.0 (and similar fuel consumption) but avoids the underpowered feel.

Shite Ron Rank: Citroen Ami

Shite Ron

Posted
Posted

gallery

FORD-CORTINA-2-0-GHIA-AUTO
 
 
Phwaaar!  Just right, brown Chatsworth interior, mismatched door, very solid and original, not too perfect, I would just sort the minor rust issues and use as is, looks good with the brake dust on the front wheels, like it’s been up and down the motorway all day    ,like they used to ?
Tenmil Socket Rank: Lancia Gamma

Tenmil Socket

Posted
Posted
23 minutes ago, Shite Ron said:

gallery

FORD-CORTINA-2-0-GHIA-AUTO
 
 
Phwaaar!  Just right, brown Chatsworth interior, mismatched door, very solid and original, not too perfect, I would just sort the minor rust issues and use as is, looks good with the brake dust on the front wheels, like it’s been up and down the motorway all day    ,like they used to ?

That's lovely but I'd be worried what's under the wob surrounding the windscreen!

Skizzer Rank: Isuzu Florian

Skizzer

Posted
Posted
15 minutes ago, Tenmil Socket said:

That's lovely but I'd be worried what's under the wob surrounding the windscreen!

I can answer that: it’ll be rust.

?

Just like George at Soup Classic Motoring found in his Cortina 80: 

https://youtu.be/5kj_LOVZE7Y

Snipes Rank: Lancia Gamma

Snipes

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, wuvvum said:

Personally I thought the 1.8T suited the 75 surprisingly well.  The 2.0 V6 sounds nicer, but you have to rev the knackers off it to get it to move, which is very uncouth.  The Turbokettle is a lot torquier.

Edit:  The obvious answer is to go for the 2.5 V6 - all the advantages of the 2.0 (and similar fuel consumption) but avoids the underpowered feel.

I assumed the Turbo was the "busier" of the two!

Spurious Rank: Renault 16

Spurious

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Hertz said:

I bet there are not many of these kicking around.

spacer.png

https://www.carandclassic.co.uk/car/C1224359

Yea, my neighbor had one. It's the only one I'd ever seen, I'd assumed it was a jap import. 

I'd suspect like most Suzuki's of that age you'd want to be careful about rot. 

 

 

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
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...