Page 3 of 7

Re: Cars that I thought would be shit but weren't.

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:59 pm
by SiC
bub2006 wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:42 pm 05 plated astra would be the cdti engine with 16v and around 100bhp minimum. Joint venture with another manufacturer maybe? The GM and Isuzu was a different engine altogether.
I thought the 1.7 ctdi astra h was still a Isuzu block?

I know the 1.7 16v Isuzu lump with common rail injection was on the 1998-2005 Civic. Iirc came in around 2002 and shoe horned in for the company car market. I had it in a 3 door and was a proper rare car even then. Made parts a nightmare (a month to have a coolant pipe custom made by Honda, £300 for an Aircon condenser - only from Honda) and working in the engine bay really bad as not designed at the outset for it.

Re: Cars that I thought would be shit but weren't.

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:17 pm
by Guest
The Trabant, according to some informed sources the worst car in the world. I was pleasantly surprised, it was crude, but quite well made crude. It had quirks, but, was useable transport as a runaround.

Re: Cars that I thought would be shit but weren't.

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:29 pm
by bub2006
SiC wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:59 pm
bub2006 wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:42 pm 05 plated astra would be the cdti engine with 16v and around 100bhp minimum. Joint venture with another manufacturer maybe? The GM and Isuzu was a different engine altogether.
I thought the 1.7 ctdi astra h was still a Isuzu block?

I know the 1.7 16v Isuzu lump with common rail injection was on the 1998-2005 Civic. Iirc came in around 2002 and shoe horned in for the company car market. I had it in a 3 door and was a proper rare car even then. Made parts a nightmare (a month to have a coolant pipe custom made by Honda, £300 for an Aircon condenser - only from Honda) and working in the engine bay really bad as not designed at the outset for it.
GM engine I believe but from what I know it's totally different to the 60-80bhp lump made by gm in the 90s. I think the early 1.7 was a modification of the 1.6 Opel/Vauxhall/GM lump of the 80s

Re: Cars that I thought would be shit but weren't.

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:31 pm
by bub2006
Sri05 wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:49 pm
bub2006 wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2019 4:42 pm 05 plated astra would be the cdti engine with 16v and around 100bhp minimum. Joint venture with another manufacturer maybe? The GM and Isuzu was a different engine altogether.
This was a very late Astra G, I'm certain it was the Isuzu engine, could be wrong though!
The dti was an evolution of the old donkey but I think the cdti was another manufacturer having input. I don't think it was a fiat lump like the 1.9 though.

Re: Cars that I thought would be shit but weren't.

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:50 pm
by SiC
Guest wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2019 6:17 pm The Trabant, according to some informed sources the worst car in the world. I was pleasantly surprised, it was crude, but quite well made crude. It had quirks, but, was useable transport as a runaround.
That's a car which has been on my bucket list for a very long time.

Re: Cars that I thought would be shit but weren't.

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 7:33 pm
by AutoshiteBoy
Volvo 400-series range. I though they all were great and miles better than a 300-series

Vauxhall Corsa auto. The addition of PAS and a proper gearbox made a huge difference.

MGB and Maestros both get the thumbs up from me.

Rover 825. Thats the VM engined 800, not the Honda or Rover V6. These things felt and smelt like a HST 125 on the motorway.

Re: Cars that I thought would be shit but weren't.

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 8:59 pm
by Junkman
SiC wrote: Tue Jun 11, 2019 2:30 pm they're a pile of shit. Well compared to modern cars they are of course
U WOT M8 ???

Re: Cars that I thought would be shit but weren't.

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:30 pm
by Hooli
Volvo 400s are as shit as 300s, in fact they are worse as they aren't even comfy to sit in while they utterly fail to be a car.

Re: Cars that I thought would be shit but weren't.

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 9:58 pm
by Kringle
Had a Clio 1.2tce hire car which turned out to be great, once you deactivated any eco bollocks.

And yes Panda 100hp is a barrel of laughs.

Re: Cars that I thought would be shit but weren't.

Posted: Tue Jun 11, 2019 10:38 pm
by NergleFuttocks
1991 Nissan Pulsar (blobby Sunny shape) 1.6 SLX

Loved that thing and due to the efi engine, had just enough power to hoon about but not enough to damage you.

Made my Newcastle to Norwich journeys at the beginning and end of the week a pleasure. One of my metrics for a car is how is it on the A17?

Probably the car I would most like to own again. H774HEW. Probably long dead now.

Pug 405 and Scorpio 2.9 follow this but don’t apply to this criteria as literally everybody in the known world agrees that they are great.