For those interested in old cars.

[PatB]

I've long been of the opinion that, under most real-world driving conditions, a torque engine can do a pretty decent impression of a powerful one. My old Beetle, nominally 50 bhp but probably nearer 40 given its advanced state of wear, was great fun to boot hard in 2nd and 3rd away from near walking pace, with the rear swing axles squatting most purposefully. OK so it ran out of puff towards the legal limit but so what? Most of its life was spent on much slower roads where it was a match for most moderns if you paid attention.

 

Autos I see as a case of horses for courses. IMHO the old style 3-speeds (BW35, Ford C4, GM Trimatic etc.)really need a decent sized engine to work well. By which I mean 2-litres and up as a minimum, with 3+ being better. As slush boxes have become more sophisticated the desirable minimum engine has come down. I don't mind them but I still tend to pick manuals for vehicles I'm buying with my own money though.

[Horsetan]

….Autos I see as a case of horses for courses. IMHO the old style 3-speeds (BW35, Ford C4, GM Trimatic etc.)really need a decent sized engine to work well. By which I mean 2-litres and up as a minimum, with 3+ being better. As slush boxes have become more sophisticated the desirable minimum engine has come down. I don't mind them but I still tend to pick manuals for vehicles I'm buying with my own money though.

 

On the other hand, autos aren't always helpful if you're trying to get out of a muddy field as they won't start from a high(er) gear. I once had to be towed out of a field at the Bluebell Railway by a tractor.

[PhilJ W]

It's been reckoned that automatic boxes will outsell manuals in the UK by 2025. Strangely sales of cars with manual gearboxes is increasing in the USA because they suffer the fewest thefts, the crooks don't know how to drive them.

[runs as required]

This was in Nottingham station car park at 03.45 this morning:

 

IMG_20180912_035028274.jpg

My first Dinky toy a two-tone green  A-S Hurricane. I'd snapped the culluloid windscreen off within the hour

[alastairq]

On the other hand, autos aren't always helpful if you're trying to get out of a muddy field as they won't start from a high(er) gear. I once had to be towed out of a field at the Bluebell Railway by a tractor.

 The period {!} instruction book with my Mustang [200 cu in 6 pot, C4 auto box]....tells the owner exactly how to do this......bearing in mind, the home market lives under snow for a good part of the year?

 

BY putting the gear lever into the '2' [hold] position, the gearbox sets off in 2nd gear.  By putting it into '1', the gearbox sets off in 1st......in drive, it usually sets off in 2nd.......Very popular gearbox in the US, was the C4.....

 

One issue I noted with typical '80's or 90's auto boxes [borg Warner mosty] was the need for the final drive ratio to be lower than the equivalent engine/vehicle with a manual [5 speed] box. This was very noticeable with a pair of SAAB 900's that lived in our family earlier this century.

The 2 litre 900 auto was revving a good deal higher at 70 mph [with fuel consumption to match] than the manual 900 turbot....Pity the 900 auto was the much nicer car, in every respect.  A lot less rusty in the chassis department, anyway.

 

Whoever bought it off my Ex got a decent motor.....it was towards the last of the original 900 production....which meant a lot of service spares were cheaper [and less fiddly] than my earlier 900 turbot.

 

The Turbo was a bus, pure & simple...a high speed bus, but a bus, all the same.

[Horsetan]

The period {!} instruction book with my Mustang [200 cu in 6 pot, C4 auto box]....tells the owner exactly how to do this......bearing in mind, the home market lives under snow for a good part of the year?

 

BY putting the gear lever into the '2' [hold] position, the gearbox sets off in 2nd gear.  By putting it into '1', the gearbox sets off in 1st......in drive, it usually sets off in 2nd.......Very popular gearbox in the US, was the C4.....

ZFs don't work like that. If you move the shift to "3" or "2", the 'box will still start off in "1" and shift up to the permitted gear.

 

One issue I noted with typical '80's or 90's auto boxes [borg Warner mosty] was the need for the final drive ratio to be lower than the equivalent engine/vehicle with a manual [5 speed] box. This was very noticeable with a pair of SAAB 900's that lived in our family earlier this century.

The 2 litre 900 auto was revving a good deal higher at 70 mph [with fuel consumption to match] than the manual 900 turbot....Pity the 900 auto was the much nicer car, in every respect.  ....

My 635 had a ZF 4HP22 with a 3.07 differential. 70mph in overdrive top registered 2050 rpm.

 

The CX only has a 3HP22. This gives 3100 rpm at 70mph. I'd really like a fourth gear.

[johnlambert]

Interesting discussions on power delivery characteristics and transmission types.

 

As I see it, the engine side of things boils down to the fact that you can use gearing to multiply torque but there's nothing you can do to multiply power.  There might be times when a car with a torquey engine might feel more punchy but ultimately an identical model with more power will be faster.  You might enjoy the former type of engine more than the latter, you might prefer the improved fuel economy and reduced need to change gear; that's fair enough.

 

I can enjoy a good automatic as much as a good manual, and you can get good results out of either if you know what you're doing.  Some of my most memorable drives were in cars with powerful, high-revving cars with delightful, close-ratio manual gearboxes.  But I also have fond memories of my 4.0-litre Jaguar XJ6 automatic, not only did that have plenty of low-down torque for lazy driving but it had a power delivery that just seemed to keep on coming, there was no disapointing tailing off of performance as the revs rise.  Thanks to the "J-gate" control for the automatic you could almost treat it like a manual if you wanted.

 

When it comes to slippery conditions some automatics have a winter mode that starts in a high gear, I've never tried one so I don't know if they work.  I know the Ford C4 automatic would start in second if you put the lever in the "2" position, although that behaviour was a feature of that particular transmission.  I fell foul of that when I owned a Ford Granada Ghia Coupe with that transmission; I'd held second gear for some reason, come to a halt and then discovered that the car was unusually sluggish when pulling away.  An object lesson in reading the manual before driving the car.

[Horsetan]

Just stumbled across a photo of the 1973 Ro80 I used to have. And that was almost 20 years ago 

 

 

The previous owner, a Mick Willett of Stoke-on-Trent, had done all the hard work of converting it to run on a Mazda RX7 rotary. He ran it for a few years, then died. I bought it in the days when something like this could be had for under a grand. Those days are gone.

[PatB]

Interesting discussions on power delivery characteristics and transmission types.

 

As I see it, the engine side of things boils down to the fact that you can use gearing to multiply torque but there's nothing you can do to multiply power. There might be times when a car with a torquey engine might feel more punchy but ultimately an identical model with more power will be faster. You might enjoy the former type of engine more than the latter, you might prefer the improved fuel economy and reduced need to change gear; that's fair enough.

 

I can enjoy a good automatic as much as a good manual, and you can get good results out of either if you know what you're doing. Some of my most memorable drives were in cars with powerful, high-revving cars with delightful, close-ratio manual gearboxes. But I also have fond memories of my 4.0-litre Jaguar XJ6 automatic, not only did that have plenty of low-down torque for lazy driving but it had a power delivery that just seemed to keep on coming, there was no disapointing tailing off of performance as the revs rise. Thanks to the "J-gate" control for the automatic you could almost treat it like a manual if you wanted.

 

When it comes to slippery conditions some automatics have a winter mode that starts in a high gear, I've never tried one so I don't know if they work. I know the Ford C4 automatic would start in second if you put the lever in the "2" position, although that behaviour was a feature of that particular transmission. I fell foul of that when I owned a Ford Granada Ghia Coupe with that transmission; I'd held second gear for some reason, come to a halt and then discovered that the car was unusually sluggish when pulling away. An object lesson in reading the manual before driving the car.

Oh, I agree that the powerful vehicle will ultimately outrun the torque one, all other things being equal, and I also agree that, when the opportunity arises to play, stirring the gearbox to maintain revs just below valve-bounce is huge fun. However, I'm definitely getting lazier as I get older and I generally find greater pleasure these days in covering ground briskly but without fuss over a sustained period.

 

A good example was when I took my BMW K100 (bike) to a track day. Although completely outclassed by 99% of the other machinery there, I found that the old dinosaur let me use its near flat torque curve to get around the entire circuit quite respectably in 3rd and 4th, only needing to hook top briefly down the back straight. The more modern sports bikes needed probably twice the number of gearchanges each time round. OK for the riders who knew what they were doing, but I passed a fair few less experienced folk who'd wrong-slotted their revvy 600 and let the engine fall off the boil, or run out of revs halfway round a corner and upset the bike by changing up.

[alastairq]

Power seems to be equated to speed.

I always believe that it's not how fast we drive, but how quickly we progress,that matters.

What price a car that can achieve 140mph, when a car with 2/3rds less bhp can get one there just as quickly, in today's average traffic conditions?

 

In fact, I believe overtaking (for example) might be an easier task with 50 bhp, than with 300bhp....which would require care not to overdo things? With such high power capability, there is the risk of the car getting there before the driver? So to speak?

[rockershovel]

Absolutely. I owned a BMW R60/6 for many years, and although not fast in absolute terms, it would make very respectable journey times overall one up, two up and with any luggage you could attach to it. I rode it to Oporto in Portugal with panniers, topbox, throwover panniers over the tank and tank top bag; you could feel the weight but it was perfectly stable.

[PhilJ W]

Sometimes a bigger engine can improve economy. Some of the Mk. I Transit motorhomes are a case in point. The 2 litre V4 struggled with the weight until someone replaced one with the 2.6 litre V6. Not only was the performance improved but so was the fuel consumption from about 18 mpg up to about 22 mpg. All down to the engine not having to work so hard. Though the engine change was virtually a bolt in swap the front end and bonnet had to be swapped to that from the diesel version.

[alastairq]

That V4 was only surpassed by the stablemate diesel Ford fitted, in the ability to make any sort of reasonable progress.....especially if a Luton body was fitted.......and there was any sort of a headwind..

But, the old Tranny certainly taught one some driving skills......like, how pointless it would be to try to pass an artic on a motorway, just because it was travelling 4 mph slower than the Tranny Luton......get up level with the cab, and that was it....no further progress....[headwind off the lorry]....

 

I used to drive EYMS buses on the 121 route....with the old LImp pians, ,gearbox-wise one was 'all-in' to top gear by 32 mph....so making any sort of passing/overtaking a real challenge....as it was done all in top gear.

 

Thus, a good seasoned 121 driver knew where all the little dips and slight downhill bits were on the route.......to aid & assist some sort of speed increase...to get around cyclists & trakertors...

What a life-change the then-new Volvo [Alexander] buses were when they arrived!  One could actually out-accelerate an Escort 1.4 to 30 mph!

Gone are the days when a driver had to seriously think what to do, to avoid stopping on a steep hill.

 

Or, how the 'ell they were going to make the bend at the bottom of Garrowby Hill, when even with 2 feet on the brake, the thing weren't slowing any.........I hated driving down to Castleton in a Bedford VAL, full of school kids.....the old right leg would be shaking when we got to the bottom!

Edited September 14, 2018 by alastairq

[Horsetan]

 

….. The 2 litre V4 struggled with the weight....

 

 That V4 was only surpassed by the stablemate diesel Ford fitted, in the ability to make any sort of reasonable progress...…..

 

If it's the same V4 block I'm thinking of, they were also a stopgap conversion for Ro80s in the bad old days, as one of the few piston engines compact enough to replace a duff rotary. Good on low-end torque, apparently, but maybe not appropriate for relaxed high-speed cruising. They were also about 20hp down.

[sandwich station]

The trouble with the Ford V4 engine was that the cylinders were set at 60deg, which made them unbalanced and not run smooth. 90deg is the optimum for a V4, whereas 60deg is the optimum for a V6.

[Rugd1022]

Just stumbled across a photo of the 1973 Ro80 I used to have. And that was almost 20 years ago 

 

dscf0128.jpg

 

The previous owner, a Mick Willett of Stoke-on-Trent, had done all the hard work of converting it to run on a Mazda RX7 rotary. He ran it for a few years, then died. I bought it in the days when something like this could be had for under a grand. Those days are gone.

 

Pic of the week for me Ivan, and several bonus points earned for it being brown. 

 

Rumour has it that one of the lads at work is thinking of offloading his Eastern European classics to buy an SM, I'll believe it when I see it (he's even slower off the mark than me) but knowing that he's had some high end exotica in the past I wouldn't put it past him to go through with it. He owns eleven classics of varying hues spread across several lock ups and garages in Northamptonshire, most of which haven't run in years and I'm always cajoling him to cash in some of them and get something he can actually use and enjoy. We shall see.

 

In the meantime I'll try not to look at any Ro80s for sale... 

Edited September 14, 2018 by Rugd1022

[Horsetan]

Pic of the week for me Ivan, and several bonus points earned for it being brown.....

Because 1970s.

 

In the meantime I'll try not to look at any Ro80s for sale...

There is a very reasonably priced one on the market at the moment, and it has a Mazda RX7 engine in it, plus a fresh MoT. I'd have it if I didn't already have the CX.

[PhilJ W]

If it's the same V4 block I'm thinking of, they were also a stopgap conversion for Ro80s in the bad old days, as one of the few piston engines compact enough to replace a duff rotary. Good on low-end torque, apparently, but maybe not appropriate for relaxed high-speed cruising. They were also about 20hp down.

I think it was the German V4 that came in 1.5 and 1.7 versions. No parts interchange at all with the British engines.

[Southern Steve]

I think it was the German V4 that came in 1.5 and 1.7 versions. No parts interchange at all with the British engines.

 

I did read that the Ford UK Essex V engine was originally designed as a diesel, hence the massively strong bottom end and it's reluctance to rev.

 

 

A mate has a TVR Tuscan with a 3litre Essex fitted, you wouldn't want to drop that on your foot! No wonder the V8 Rover is so sought after, must be half the weight.

[PhilJ W]

I did read that the Ford UK Essex V engine was originally designed as a diesel, hence the massively strong bottom end and it's reluctance to rev.

 

 

A mate has a TVR Tuscan with a 3litre Essex fitted, you wouldn't want to drop that on your foot! No wonder the V8 Rover is so sought after, must be half the weight.

That explains the combustion chamber in the piston head and the completely flat cylinder head, a common feature on diesel engines..

[New Haven Neil]

Not apropos anything classic, but for years I thought autos were for old people and lazy folk, and were awful to drive.  Having had to buy one due to mashing my left foot, I find the i30 6 speed diesel auto to be a rather nice thing to drive - they're come a long way.  Not exactly Korean though, designed in Germany and built in Hungary!  My view of autos has changes markedly. I am a bit old though, now!

 

That R80 is lush, Ivan - whatever made you sell it?

[Horsetan]

....That Ro80 is lush, Ivan - whatever made you sell it?

Well, not having quite enough cash at the time to run a horse and two classics (the 635CSi was the other) simultaneously was the basic problem, and there was no way I was giving up a perfectly good horse:

 

Edited September 14, 2018 by Horsetan

[Jol Wilkinson]

I did read that the Ford UK Essex V engine was originally designed as a diesel, hence the massively strong bottom end and it's reluctance to rev.

 

 

A mate has a TVR Tuscan with a 3litre Essex fitted, you wouldn't want to drop that on your foot! No wonder the V8 Rover is so sought after, must be half the weight.

The Ford Xflow 1300 and 1600 engines also had the combustion chamber in the piston, with a flat cylinder head. It was all about more power/efficiency and lower production cost, as I recall.

 

The V4 was apparently "shortened" to fit in the Transit, That left little space between the cylinder bores and head gasket failure on the V's wasn't uncommon, until they sorted out a stronger gasket design after a couple of years.

[alastairq]

Well, not having quite enough cash at the time to run a horse and two classics (the 635CSi was the other) simultaneously was the basic problem, and there was no way I was giving up a perfectly good horse:

 

Rory dozing.JPG

 

Ooooh! Half a 2CV? 

[Kickstart]

That explains the combustion chamber in the piston head and the completely flat cylinder head, a common feature on diesel engines..

Early Alfa boxer engines used a similar setup, and the old Moto Morini V twins.

 

Limits valve sizes, but makes the head a doddle to machine (and skimming the head should the head gasket go doesn’t change the compression).

 

Katy