deleted

[scooters]

deleted

[coalnotdole]

You could buy an Allegro?

[garethj]

I reckon Volvo plastics are probably stronger than BL metal

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

A 1996 Accord exhudes much more kwalitee than that ovlov. I may be able to sell you one!

[Guest Leonard Hatred]

wouldn't have happened in the good old days....no....then we had Allegros and stuff not these nasty mondeos with Volvo badges!

 

I might be wrong, but doesn't the 850 have approximately zero Ford content?

[scooters]

drives me to distraction..

 

funnily enough the best built car I think I have owned is a Daf...age aside they are formed from thick, strong steel well put together, the interiors are very hard wearing with little to break/ go wrong. The simplicity of the transmission means provided you keep your belts and vacuum hoses in nick there's not a lot to go wrong and the air cooled Daf flat 2 engines are very solid - the sort of ow compression engine you can leave in a shed for 40 years,drop in some redex, plubs, leads and a battery and they start on the third turn....if there is ever a nuclear winter then I will try and find an aircooled Day to drive..

 

 

850 Ford Content....Len...you are probably right, but it's a well trod rant ovlov forums - the FWD mob vs th RWD mob who tend to call all the FWD cars 'fords' ....having owned a few modern Fords the insult is a bit lame...the V6 Ghia X Mondeo I had was a fantastic car and certaily - for combination of running costs, reliability, power and confort was I think a better car than the 850...

[dieselnutjob]

an 850 with the VW/Audi 5 cyl TDI would be a nice thing I think

[Barry Cade]

850's are ACE.

[Pete-M]

I liked my 850.

 

Ok, there were the odd bits of daft design, like putting the notoriously wank breather system tank under the inlet manifold where it's a ball-ache to change, but otherwise it was a bloody good and very capable car. Far more capable and reliable than an Allegro.

 

'Modern' stuff has to get around a multitude of regulations and requirements that simply didn't exist when the Allegro, Model T, Horsey Horseless were current. Emissions regs are a hell of a lot tighter, impact regs mean that things simply cannot be shoved anywhere, and under the bonnet space is at a loss simply because a 2.4 litre five cylinder, fuel injected, turbocharged, air conditioned, 4wd, ABS braked, PAS equipped car engine bay with crumple zones etc is gonna be a fair bit tighter than one which only has to cope with a carb equipped A or B series lump.

 

Yes, Volvo have saved money by using the odd cheap bit, but the pipe on the PAS pump was fine until you tw@ted it. If they'd engineered the thing using brass fittings etc then instead of being £25k new it would have been a fair few quid more and weighed the same as France.

 

As it is, the 850 isn't actually that heavy for a car of its size and complexity, and is a lot quicker, better handling and more fuel efficient than if it had been a late '60s design without all the electronics etc. Imagine trying to get a reliable 190ish bhp from a 2.4 on carbs. Ferrari only managed 195 bhp from the Dino 246, and I bet one of those won't be quite as easy to start in the morning as your old Ovlov, or as cheap to fix... When it comes to more mainstream stuff, the VX 4/90 was a quick(ish) 2.3 family car in the '70s and that managed a throbbing 115 bhp (and about 20 mpg).

 

I certainly wouldn't like to go back to running a '70s car on a high mileage daily basis. The breakdowns and constant servicing / repairs would drive me insane.

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

I certainly wouldn't like to go back to running a '70s car on a high mileage daily basis. The breakdowns and constant servicing / repairs would drive me insane.

 

I agree with that, however you need to balance it against the fact that we haven't seen much improvement after independent suspension, fuel injection and electronic ignition (Chrysler Alpine FTW) got established (early 1980s for big cars, early 1990s for superminis)...some more electrical gadgets, maybe slightly smoother gearboxes, and that's it really. A 2011 (petrol) Mongdeo isn't significantly quicker, more comfortable or reliable than the equivalent 1986 Granada/Scorpio (in fact, on less-than-perfect roads it may be significantly LESS comfortable due to the stupid big wheels).

[oman5]

Stick me down in the RWD ovlov camp. sorry...I owned an 850 after years of driving 240/740s. a fantastic car to drive and I loved it dearly, but really not built to the same standard as the older ones. front tyres that got chewed up after only 10k even with spot on tracking, and the gearbox went pop on 140,000 miles.

went back to the 740 instead. no it doesn't go or handle like an 850 but it sure as hell lasts a lot better.

as for running a '70s car everyday, throughout most of the 90's my everyday wheels was a 1972 cortina. it never broke down, just needed void bushes for every MOT and the odd bit of welding. I'd still have one now if I could afford the petrol. One of the best examples of simple is reliable.

[Pete-M]

as for running a '70s car everyday, throughout most of the 90's my everyday wheels was a 1972 cortina. it never broke down, just needed void bushes for every MOT and the odd bit of welding. I'd still have one now if I could afford the petrol. One of the best examples of simple is reliable.

 

I bet it needed a fair bit more 'tweaking' than a modern though. I ran a 2.0 Capri for a while seven or eight years ago. That didn't break down either, provided I spent an hour or two every couple of weeks fiddling with it, setting ignition timing, plug gaps, mixture etc... There's always something to fix on older cars.

 

When my 850 T5 needed its crankcase breather tank replaced (at 128,000 miles) I used my '72 Rover P6B for a couple of weeks. It didn't break down or go wrong once, but sitting in traffic on a hot August day watching the oil pressure slowly drop (at idle) as the engine began to get warm, feeling that very slight splutter as the fuel in the carbs began to vapourise in the heat meant that city traffic became a worrying place to be. Having the ammeter pulse in time with the indicators - which slowed at idle - and a slightly tempramental hot start habit (vaporisation again) were, to me, a reminder of how good modern cars are.

 

Yes the Rover had infinately more charm, but for the daily drive I'd pick a nice air conditioned EFi car every time.

 

This is why I really don't want to get rid of the XJR. It's old enough to be interesting, but modern enough to not need servicing every weekend. Change the oil ever 6k, give it a look over every few months (up on a ramp, check bushes, pads etc), plugs and filters once a year.

[Guest]

Depends what it is. My Galant is only really a substantial facelift of a car from 1976 (mechanicals are same) and I'm happy racking the miles up on that, never really wants any tinkering other than basic servicing. I haven't a clue about setting mixture and suchlike, but it never seems to need doing. I doubt back in the day the owner was constantly looking under the bonnet either. It just seems to get by on general servicing and the odd preventative item.

[r.welfare]

Japanese stuff is good for that though. I put 35,000 miles on a 1984 Prelude in 18 months with no fettling required at all, the only breakdown was the alternator as I recall. Not bad for a 15 year old car.

 

I loved my 405TD's but they needed tinkering every other weekend. The two Brit transplants we run now don't need anything other than scheduled maintenance (although I prefer to change the oil and filter every 5k to be on the safe side). Sure, they're boring as hell, but with a toddler in the house I'm happy to forgo character and driving enjoyment for stuff that just works.

[Tayne]

.

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

As the 2011 is heavier (owing to being safer and having more toys) its similar performance is actually better performance than the 1986.

 

Safety is a bit relative. Sure, the new car is better if you do have an accident, but quite often the old car is better equipped (more agile chassis, better visibility) to avoid it in the first place. I am not saying the old one is automatically better, just that the difference isn't as big as carmakers say.

 

Its also going to be more economical.

 

Perhaps it'll be a bit more frugal, although some of that is again negated by the weight (and again, I recall getting surprisingly good economy from a 2.0 twink Granny I used to own for a couple of months). However, unless you're a hardcore shitist with access to a good source of part-worns, the difference between a standard set of 195/65/15 tyres and whatever goes on the 18" monstrosities will probably be enough to wipe out the fuel savings achieved over thousands of miles!

 

Regarding progress, look at all the stiff that was only on big cars back in '86 but has now moved down to smaller cars.

I'm not just talking about hot and cold running cruise control but safety stuff like ABS and airbags as well as comfort things like heated seats.

 

That obviously is true- basically a result of electronics getting cheaper and cheaper.

[Tayne]

.

[warren t claim]

So is an 2007 Ford KA more reliable than a 1965 Ford Anglia that's fitted with a very similar engine?

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

I'll give you visibility, but I'm not giving you nimbleness.

Do you want to race an '86 Granny against an '11 Mondeo?

I know which will win....

 

Nimbleness is also affected by, wait for it, weight! Something that's half a tonne heavier than something else is by definition harder to manoeveur (sp?), and advances in chassis dynamics haven't been big enough to offset that, and that's before even factoring in the weight distribution advantages of a RWD car like the Granada against a nose-heavy design.

 

I guess that a trained driver with a 2.0 DOHC Granada wouldn't have any problems keeping up with a 2011 Mondeo 1.6 Turdo. In fact, you don't even need to do that- the mere fact that Ford don't offer the Mongdeo with any non-turbo petrol engines is enough to know there's something rotten in the kingdom!

[Barry Cade]

I'll give you visibility, but I'm not giving you nimbleness.

Do you want to race an '86 Granny against an '11 Mondeo?

I know which will win...

 

 

I can see where this is going...

 

 

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

handbags at dawn!

 

Just to keep this in context, I am not saying that there hasn't been ANY progress over the past 25 years, just that it's been pretty tiny compared to what we'd seen in 10 or so years between '75ish and '85ish.

[Barry Cade]

handbags at dawn!

 

Just to keep this in context, I am not saying that there hasn't been ANY progress over the past 25 years, just that it's been pretty tiny compared to what we'd seen in 10 or so years between '75ish and '85ish.

 

I'd disagree totally- I got into the trade in 1992, and things have moved on unbelieveably since then. Almost unrecogniseable.Hate it. . Mk3 Cortina to Sierra, and Sierra to Mk 5 or whatever Mondeo?

 

Start with A.

Airbags

ABS

Air Con

ASD

Auto headlamps

Auto wipers

Air suspension

 

 

carry on through the alphabet, then do the same from 75-85, see which list is bigger...

[Pete-M]

So is an 2007 Ford KA more reliable than a 1965 Ford Anglia that's fitted with a very similar engine?

 

I'd say so, yes. In the case of the old Endura Kent lump (which I think died or mutated again in 2004ish) anyway.

 

Not as easy or simple to fix when it does break, but a lot less likely to break in the first place. Not just because of electronics and engine management, but also through improved metallurgy and 40 years of minor mechanical tweaks. Getting 150,000 miles from an Anglia engine would have taken a fair bit of doing even in the '60s. I see quite a few stratospheric mileage Kas about and know a few people who've run them way past 100k without much sympathy other than using the right oil.

 

Always was a strong little lump the Kent..

[Tayne]

.

[Barry Cade]

 

Nimbleness is also affected by, wait for it, weight! Something that's half a tonne heavier than something else is by definition harder to manoeveur (sp?), and advances in chassis dynamics haven't been big enough to offset that,

 

If we're comparing a stock Granny with a Granny that has a pallet of bricks in the boot then weight is the huge deciding factor.

 

If you want to ignore 25 years of development then go ahead.

 

But isn't it going too far? The Mk1 Focus was an excellent handler, whereas the new one isnt- but has lots of electronics to make it safe in an unsafe situation. I read somewhere that designers are now pretty much ignoring suspension design as the black boxes will stop the car/driver doing anything silly. I think its gone past making good cars to just making convenience appliances. Its all about dashboard grain and i-pod connections now.

 

Put it another way. You're a getaway driver and there's a hundred grand in it for you if you get them safely away.. Mk3 Escort 1.6, Focus Mk1 2.0 Zetec or Mk 3 Focus 1.6 TDci.?

[Tayne]

.

[Barry Cade]

I'll agree that modern cars are dumbed down and lack driver enjoyment but for anywhere other than the deserted country road at 6am on a summers morning the modern wins

 

 

Depends what you use a car for.

And if you read Autocar or Autoshite.

 

Stats? stats are bollocks. 200BHP delivered over 1500 revs is NOT better than a nice flat torque curve and 150BHP.. Thats just Top Trumps shit.

 

I've got a 86 X1/9 and a 97 Audi A4. A 60 mile a day commute. The Audi has a 6 speaker stereo, air con,power steering,brakes,mirrors,ABS- lots of stuff. The X1/9 has lights.sometimes. I use the Fiat every day because I LIKE driving. Its alive. The Audi (and every other post 95 ish car I've had) frustrates me not because of their lack of mod cons, but the fact that it has multi link suspension etc, but its totally dead to drive. Nowadays you need 5000BHP to have any fun, but when you just about begin to shuffle about in your seat and adopt attack mode, the driver "aids" cut in. Switch them off and the crappy chassis takes over, and kills you.

 

Oh, and another thing- they may go faster and use less fuel, but the jams are much longer nowadays because the average family car is 32 feet long... and still has less room than a Maxi.

 

Bollocks to the 50MPG and 30 quid road tax. Feck the dual zone air con. Stick your I Pod compatibility up yer arse. If the government bans cars over 10 years old, I'm getting a horse.

 

Still love 850's though.

[scooters]

i'll tell ye this....these moadern cars are witchcraft so they are.........

 

yes i like my 850....my real gripe is around components that have to be replaced as a whole when the issue is a small part of it....850 vs allegro....well 3 years ago i would have said 850....but that was before attending dr torstens clinic!

[Luxobarges_Are_Us]

 

I'm not suggesting everyone should rush out and finance their kids for a Mondeo (I'm not going to) but you have to be pretty pig-headed to deny the progress when the newer car has a smaller engine yet develops more power, more torque, goes faster and uses less fuel.

 

But how much of that extra power would it have been able to produce without the turbo? Probably about a third of it tops.

 

Again, there's no denying that progress has been made, it's just that the rate of it has moved from leaps-and-bounds to fine-tuning...and that's not necessarily a bad thing!

[fiatdaft]

the 2.0 non turbo makes 145 bhp .