For those interested in old cars.

[russ p]

8 hours ago, MJI said:

 

I quite liked the Maestros nice and roomy inside, but they had a lot of hate, no idea why. Yet I did not like the Princess, don't know why, but did like the P6 V8.

 

Sadly there is still a lot of unfounded anti BL/Rover stuff going on

A few years ago I looked at a freelander diesel at a garage in Fakenham 

I asked the owner what engine it had , he replied you're lucky it's the BMW. 

I said you're not I wanted the Rover engine.  Then he started a completely uneducated rant about how the head gaskets fail on them. The L series diesel doesn't have a problem with them at all.

I have cars with both and whilst the Rover unit is slightly more noisy its far more powerful and economical than the BMW in the ZT

Just about everything that has gone wrong with the ZT which admittedly isn't much has been a BMW part.

My missus has an MG3 not because it's an MG as its not. It was a cheap easy to service modern car.

I asked the service manager at the dealership where we got it for his truthful opinion on them and his words were they are OK but not a rover.

He owed a real MG ZS and a metro turbo so a decent chap! Well in my opinion 

Since the maestro has gone back on the road it has caused a lot of interest happily all positive.  I got fuel at a garage along the coast the garage owner asked if it was OK to take pictures and his workshop staff all came out to see it so maybe things are changing.  It even won best in show at a fairly big local show.

[MJI]

25 minutes ago, russ p said:

 

Sadly there is still a lot of unfounded anti BL/Rover stuff going on

A few years ago I looked at a freelander diesel at a garage in Fakenham 

I asked the owner what engine it had , he replied you're lucky it's the BMW. 

I said you're not I wanted the Rover engine.  Then he started a completely uneducated rant about how the head gaskets fail on them. The L series diesel doesn't have a problem with them at all.

I have cars with both and whilst the Rover unit is slightly more noisy its far more powerful and economical than the BMW in the ZT

Just about everything that has gone wrong with the ZT which admittedly isn't much has been a BMW part.

My missus has an MG3 not because it's an MG as its not. It was a cheap easy to service modern car.

I asked the service manager at the dealership where we got it for his truthful opinion on them and his words were they are OK but not a rover.

He owed a real MG ZS and a metro turbo so a decent chap! Well in my opinion 

Since the maestro has gone back on the road it has caused a lot of interest happily all positive.  I got fuel at a garage along the coast the garage owner asked if it was OK to take pictures and his workshop staff all came out to see it so maybe things are changing.  It even won best in show at a fairly big local show.

Well since the most reliable recent land rover engine is a development of the L not surprised.

 

Frafile ford v6 fragile transit engine, not very good 3l bmw 6.

 

I'll stick with a 5 cylinder lr lump.

[Hobby]

I nailed my allegiance to BMC/BL/AR many pages ago, another person that has gone through a succession of their cars starting with a Mini and finishing with Maestro and Montego and then repeating when I started buying classics, though the larger cars, Maxi upwards!

 

I can't agree with a Princess GTi, though, that's against everything the car is, however a GT version, as in the Grand Tourer version of the name rather than the boy racer version would suit it just fine, a five speed 'box as standard, though! I was talking to an owner of a Jag XJS on Sunday and he was saying that too many uninformed people compared it to the E type when in fact it was a very good GT, not a sports car like the E type. Some cars suit the "i" badge, the Maestro being one, but some don't.

 

I currently have two of Longbridge's most underrated, but probably best made, cars a Rover 216 and a Honda Concerto!

Edited September 26, 2023 by Hobby

[MJI]

3 minutes ago, Hobby said:

I nailed my allegiance to BMC/BL/AR many pages ago, another person that has gone through a succession of their cars starting with a Mini and finishing with Maestro and Montego and then repeating when I started buying classics, though the larger cars, Maxi upwards!

 

I can't agree with a Princess GTi, though, that's against everything the car is, however a GT version, as in the Grand Tourer version of the name rather than the boy racer version would suit it just fine, a five speed 'box as standard, though! I was talking to an owner of a Jag XJS on Sunday and he was saying that too many uninformed people compared it to the E type when in fact it was a very good GT, not a sports car like the E type. Some cars suit the "i" badge, the Maestro being one, but some don't.

 

I currently have two of Longbridge's most underrated, but probably best made, cars a Rover 216 and a Honda Concerto!

My early favourites were late Rootes.

 

Ok Sunbeam and Avenger.

 

Later on GM V cars

 

But always wanted a land rover

[russ p]

6 minutes ago, MJI said:

Well since the most reliable recent land rover engine is a development of the L not surprised.

 

Frafile ford v6 fragile transit engine, not very good 3l bmw 6.

 

I'll stick with a 5 cylinder lr lump.

 

Is that the G series or a JLR development of the L series 

[MJI]

1 minute ago, russ p said:

 

Is that the G series or a JLR development of the L series 

TD5 unit injector lr version

Edited September 26, 2023 by MJI

[russ p]

Just now, MJI said:

TD5

 

Ah of course I was forgetting that was related to the L series 

[MJI]

Just now, russ p said:

 

Ah of course I was forgetting that was related to the L series 

It is a really good engine.

[steve1]

1 hour ago, MJI said:

My early favourites were late Rootes.

 

Ok Sunbeam and Avenger.

 

Later on GM V cars

 

But always wanted a land rover

 

With you on Avengers. I’ve had two, one of them was my first car.

 

Would love a Tiger or even a 2dr GT if circumstances could permit.

 

steve

[MJI]

1 hour ago, steve1 said:

 

With you on Avengers. I’ve had two, one of them was my first car.

 

Would love a Tiger or even a 2dr GT if circumstances could permit.

 

steve

 

Comfy and handled well, in 1.6 form quite nippy, also a good advert for bigger is better, 1.6 is a lot nicer.

[Dunsignalling]

19 hours ago, MJI said:

 

Basic versions usually go quite quickly, not cared for, or if VGC gets upgraded with bits from nicer models.

 

Problem is that some of these basic ones are quite nasty in some ways.

 

Nastiest nasty is when two engines are very similar, but one has bigger holes in it. Same weight, a bit more power, a lot more torque, higher gearing, and better fuel consumption. So surviving smaller ones get the very similar bigger engine from a scrappy.

 

I have driven some horrid underpowered cars, (quite a few GM) where the next up was miles better. A good example was the blobby Astra 1200 horrid, 1300 fun, actually that 1300 was the pick as it was more fun than the 1600.

 

However it does end up with some cars going extinct, I bet there are very few if any Sunbeam hatch 1.0 on the road, most have been used for parts, engines for Imps and kit cars, bodies for 1.6 and 2.2 running gear. Come to think of it 25 years ago when I had mone I remember seeing 2x 1.3s and one of those was a rally car I was following with no diffficulty at all (mine was fast road 1.6), the othe rnot selling.

 

What survives the banger crowd becomes the future classic cars. 60 and 70s cars were ripe for alteration so a lot of cars of that era which survived got owned  by people who did them up.

The Mk1 Ford Escort in 1100cc form was utterly dire, compounded by having drum brakes which were seldom concentric.

 

Dad had a company one. Bloody stupid idea as he did daft miles. Six new front drums before he got two round ones, engine worn out inside two years, and scrapped not long after scraping through its first MoT....Mum's old Anglia 1200 Super would run rings round it, and stopped much better.

 

Go for the car your dad had, as the guy on B&C says? Not one of those even in a gift. A '61 Hillman Minx might get to me though!

 

Dad had a series of Fords; two 100Es, side valve, 3 gears and vaccy wipers (enough said) the Anglia (mechanically brilliant but a total rotbox), and the Escort. By that time, his own car, the Minx, was seven years old but still ten times the car the Ford was new.

 

My own motoring career has been a sit-up-and-beg Ford Pop (one good one created from two five quid scrappers while still at school), a Reliant 3/25, a Renault 10, a Vauxhall Firenza 2.3, two more Renaults (12TL and 18 GTS), a 1.1 Fiesta (final nail in the coffin for any more Fords), three Peugeots, 205xs, 206 d- turbo (both glorious and trouble-free, I kept each for a decade) 207sw (underwhelming and uncomfortable). Current and quite possibly my last, a late Mk1 Skoda Yeti CR170.

 

Past Favourites? The Firenza was a beast and great fun, but had been abused before I got it and was a money pit,  the Renault 18GTS, deceptively quick, surprisingly economical and super comfy (a real motorway burner), the first two Peugeots, everything they did, they did well, and rarely cost me more than servicing and tyres. 

 

The Yeti is head and shoulders above the rest though.  She'll turn ten in November, with only 62k on the clock, and is far too good to pass on to anyone else while I'm still around!

 

John.

 

 

 

Edited September 26, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[Northmoor]

I knew a few people with Renault 18s, very under-rated cars and almost extinct now.  As for the life of 1100cc Mk1 Escorts, one of my Uni lecturers had been on the design team at Halewood; the design life was 1000hrs at 70mph, so anyone who had done more than a little stop-start driving in the car to beyond that, should have been told to expect it to do 400 miles to the pint (of oil).

 

As an aside, I was reading a recent What Car on the train today and really, really struggled to find a single vehicle I have any interest in owning (let alone buying).  Absolutely every vehicle seems to have more things to fiddle with (and go wrong) than the bridge of the Starship Enterprise.  Now I know vehicles are much more reliable than in my youth, but while I am driving a 20 year old car now, will a 2023 car still be maintainable in 2043?  I suspect that the (deferred) date for ending sales of purely IC-engined cars won't be a problem, as so many drivers will have to scrap their cars - with unmarked bodies, years and 200k miles of life left in the running gear - because a couple of PCBs will have gone u/s and are irreplaceable.  What a staggering, criminal waste of resources we are being forced to sign up to.

 

But maybe I/we are the oddballs now.  Very few people are interested in cars any more - which is reflected in their driving - and treat purchasing a car like they would purchasing a large TV; paying as much as they can barely afford for masses of features they will likely never use.

[MJI]

54 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

I knew a few people with Renault 18s, very under-rated cars and almost extinct now.  As for the life of 1100cc Mk1 Escorts, one of my Uni lecturers had been on the design team at Halewood; the design life was 1000hrs at 70mph, so anyone who had done more than a little stop-start driving in the car to beyond that, should have been told to expect it to do 400 miles to the pint (of oil).

 

As an aside, I was reading a recent What Car on the train today and really, really struggled to find a single vehicle I have any interest in owning (let alone buying).  Absolutely every vehicle seems to have more things to fiddle with (and go wrong) than the bridge of the Starship Enterprise.  Now I know vehicles are much more reliable than in my youth, but while I am driving a 20 year old car now, will a 2023 car still be maintainable in 2043?  I suspect that the (deferred) date for ending sales of purely IC-engined cars won't be a problem, as so many drivers will have to scrap their cars - with unmarked bodies, years and 200k miles of life left in the running gear - because a couple of PCBs will have gone u/s and are irreplaceable.  What a staggering, criminal waste of resources we are being forced to sign up to.

 

But maybe I/we are the oddballs now.  Very few people are interested in cars any more - which is reflected in their driving - and treat purchasing a car like they would purchasing a large TV; paying as much as they can barely afford for masses of features they will likely never use.

I have a near 20 year old land rover product outside. A 14 year old tv in front of me and a 38 year old working vcr under it.

 

Tv was 1.5k vcr was 300 discounted from 600

 

My 1.5k tv out lasted a lot of people i know TVs and also their replacements.

 

Yes 60 years old and only 4 TVs owned.

[MJI]

I remember that the 1600 short stroke Hillman Chrysler Talbot engine was good for 100,000 without lifting head

[KeithMacdonald]

44 minutes ago, Northmoor said:

Absolutely every vehicle seems to have more things to fiddle with (and go wrong) than the bridge of the Starship Enterprise. 

 

I concur.

 

A recent conversation with a friend in the motor trade was quite enlightening. Most of us old geezers grew up with generations of cars that were 99% analogue and mechanical, and a practical person with basic skills could fix many things at home. In the last 20 years or so, many brands that were previously regarded as rock-solid and reliable (like Mercedes) have now had a generation of cars crammed-full of really-clever electronics. That is, really-clever when they work, but when they go wrong, they are not a part that the dealer workships can repair for a few £10's or £100's. Whole units are now rip-out-and-replace.

 

One was a Fleet Manager just at a time when his Exec Board sanctioned a move from BMW/Audi to all Mercedes. Maybe the same would have happened with the next-gen of BMW/Audi, but their Merc down-time doubled, the workshop hourly rate went up 60%, and the repair bills became eye-wateringly astronomical. One car (full of all the really-clever electronics) had got some water ingestion around the rear lights. Except the damp penetrated and blew out the Merc's "hind brain" - a cluster of ECUs and computers near the tail lights. The bill was £9,000.

 

I'm assuming that's one of the reasons insurance premiums have sky-rocketed as well?

 

My friend in the motor trade had a couple of simple messages -

1) If you are buying a second-hand car for personal use, of any make, try and buy the last generation with mechanical controls, and avoid the high-tech cars like the plague.

2) If you are buying new, for company use, get a long-term fully-inclusive warranty or deal that includes parts and labour for longer than you intent keeping the car.

[Dunsignalling]

9 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

I concur.

 

A recent conversation with a friend in the motor trade was quite enlightening. Most of us old geezers grew up with generations of cars that were 99% analogue and mechanical, and a practical person with basic skills could fix many things at home. In the last 20 years or so, many brands that were previously regarded as rock-solid and reliable (like Mercedes) have now had a generation of cars crammed-full of really-clever electronics. That is, really-clever when they work, but when they go wrong, they are not a part that the dealer workships can repair for a few £10's or £100's. Whole units are now rip-out-and-replace.

 

One was a Fleet Manager just at a time when his Exec Board sanctioned a move from BMW/Audi to all Mercedes. Maybe the same would have happened with the next-gen of BMW/Audi, but their Merc down-time doubled, the workshop hourly rate went up 60%, and the repair bills became eye-wateringly astronomical. One car (full of all the really-clever electronics) had got some water ingestion around the rear lights. Except the damp penetrated and blew out the Merc's "hind brain" - a cluster of ECUs and computers near the tail lights. The bill was £9,000.

 

I'm assuming that's one of the reasons insurance premiums have sky-rocketed as well?

 

My friend in the motor trade had a couple of simple messages -

1) If you are buying a second-hand car for personal use, of any make, try and buy the last generation with mechanical controls, and avoid the high-tech cars like the plague.

2) If you are buying new, for company use, get a long-term fully-inclusive warranty or deal that includes parts and labour for longer than you intent keeping the car.

To be sure of getting fully manual controls on a premium, or even mainstream, brand, you may need to go back some considerable way, probably getting on for two decades.

 

I had a Peugeot 207 (2010 fwiw, but they came out in 2006, I think), and it featured "drive by wire" electrics,.

 

AIUI that was effectively a parallel to DCC where the system carried a constant current and a central control unit relayed commands from the driver's switches, buttons, throttle pedal etc, to the various components, presumably via "decoders" in each unit. 

 

TTBOMK, Peugeot/Citroen were not the first to adopt this kind of arrangement, and it (or something like it) fairly quickly became widespread, if not universal, across the industry.

 

Regarding your comment on the expensive Mercedes repair issue, I am aware of otherwise almost mint examples of ten or so years old being "scrapped"* because fixing the dead electronics would cost as much as/more than, the car is worth. That won't be confined to Mercs, but residuals on big cars do tend to drop faster than average.

 

*What actually happens is that they end up in the hands of specialist dismantlers and the good bits do get used to keep other cars going via independent garages. Authorised dealerships don't use them or not officially at least....

 

A friend had the dashboard "everything" screen fail on his, then recently acquired, low mileage, six-year-old Honda Accord a good while ago and was very thankful for the dealer warranty that saved him a four-figure bill for replacing it. 

 

John  

Edited September 27, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[Hobby]

ECUs go back to the mid/late 80s as well, so you'd have to go back a long, long, way for an "analogue" car! 

[Dunsignalling]

6 minutes ago, Hobby said:

ECUs go back to the mid/late 80s as well, so you'd have to go back a long, long, way for an "analogue" car! 

I widespread use, definitely, but a pal of mine had a SAAB 99EMS that (I think) pioneered them, back in 1972 or '73.

 

Presence of a carburettor rather than fuel injection, is probably what the technophobe needs to look for....

 

Edited September 27, 2023 by Dunsignalling

[Hobby]

3 minutes ago, Dunsignalling said:

I widespread use, definitely, but a pal of mine had a SAAB 99EMS that (I think) pioneered them, back in 1972 or '73.

 

Presence of a carburettor rather than fuel injection, is probably what the technophobe needs to look for....

 

 

Yes I meant widespread use, most cars back in the mid and late 80s used them, I'd agree about carbs, though there were some cars that held onto them longer than others, my '91 Concerto has them!

[Dunsignalling]

2 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

Yes I meant widespread use, most cars back in the mid and late 80s used them, I'd agree about carbs, though there were some cars that held onto them longer than others, my '91 Concerto has them!

As did my '91 Peugeot 205xs, but I think injection became pretty much universal across most brands with the next model-generation, so 1993-5 or thereabouts?

 

I went over to turbo diesels after the 205, so I lost track somewhat with petrol cars, but I think late 205s (not just the GTi) also got injection, I've certainly seen it on a CJ.

[MJI]

My last car was DBW and fine, current one is EUI and fine.

 

Older ECUs tend to be more robust.

[russ p]

47 minutes ago, Hobby said:

ECUs go back to the mid/late 80s as well, so you'd have to go back a long, long, way for an "analogue" car! 

 

I remember being terrified of ECU failure when I first got a maestro EFi in the mid 80s but in all those years and owned about 10 I've only come across one with a faulty fuel ECU. It still ran but very rich. Because of this fault I bought it for 50 quid! 

The cause of it is catching a spanner on the battery positive on the airflow meter

I've had airflow meters play up but on the whole it's a reliable system.  I've managed to get hold of all the Austin rover fast check modules for setting up and testing the system.  

Far simpler than a modern car

[alastairq]

Not all older infection systems use electronics[ECUs]...Anything with Bosch K Jetronic fuel injection might not have an ECU.  Bosch L Jetronic was, I believe, ECU controlled {???}

I came across K jetronic injection in my Volvo 740 estate, F plater...On the whole a very reliable car, let down a bit by lack of reliability within non-Volvo engine components... The fuel system was essentially ''mechanically' operated....[needed to have the manifold cleaned out every year, however]...

Volvo 2 litre engines seemed to be 'the best of the bunch'....In my hands, could out-handle any BMW that cared to stay with me through local bends...

 

Probably the latest diesels that didn't have common rail technology, or ECUs of any description could be found in the long missed Daihatsu 4Trak range...These went up to the turn of the century....[this century, not the last century!!]..Good for 250,000 miles without overhaul, good also for 100 bhp, out of 2.8 litres, low revving [when compared to common rail engines]...A favoured replacement diesel engine for Land Rover owners.... 

 

In my shed, I have the two 'black boxes' I took out of my old MG Maestro 2 litre...If they are any use to other enthusiasts, then feel free to 'PM' me?

 

 

[Kickstart]

2 hours ago, Dunsignalling said:

As did my '91 Peugeot 205xs, but I think injection became pretty much universal across most brands with the next model-generation, so 1993-5 or thereabouts?

 

Became pretty much a requirement when catlytic converters became required in 1992 or so. There were the odd car that used carbs and had a cat, but probably wasn't good for cat life. Did have a 1992 Alfa floating around with carbs, but it was an Irish import (1350 engine with power steering and a pair of downdraft carbs)

 

All the best

 

Katy

[alastairq]

Has anybody noticed, how incredibly low current  auction values for pre-WW2 commonplace cars are?

 

It seems, nobody really wants anything more mundane, pre-WW2?

[Whilst there always will be a healthy market for pre-WW2 Alvises, Bentleys, and other more noticeable models....}

 

I'm thinking of the more mundane makes, such as Austin 10s, 8s, Singers, etc?

Many darned good cars simply going for relative peanuts?

 

OK, so road performances for today's traffic isn't exactly brilliant, but hey....no worse than many of the smoky clapped out 10- year old Ford Transits, either.

 

I would say, if it can reach a steady 50 mph or so, then that's more than adequate for today's traffic!

 

Cannot complain about electronics, etc, with pre-WW2, can we??

 

For real revenge on modern drivers, how's about a 1930s long Jowett?

 

Lucky if it'll reach 45 downhill, but just to annoy everybody, it'll just keep on going!

{Secretly, I have little or no time these days for the inadequacies of modern drivers, and their modern cars.....Currently I have a twice weekly dad's taxi run to York down the A166....That road is a mix of NSL [once up & over the hill, or down it]...and 50  limit where a myriad of side roads causes modern drivers who drive faster than their abilities, crash, repeatedly....Driving my old [21 YO] suzuki GV petrol at around the 50 mph mark all the way...I find that, when I get to the A64 junction, I am but a couple of cars behind the must-get-ons in their supah doopah Audis and BMWobblies...Which really must annoy them as I slide quietly alongside them in the next lane....The point being, it doesn't matter what speed one does, traffic being traffic, it will always bring everyone down to the same level. BTW,  the Suzuki's cruising speed is as much dictated by the revs as anything else. Oddly, I seem to have more time to deal with the eedjits, and use the actual brakes a lot less......Doesn't help the hyperactive younger drivers out there, however...]