Best cars you've owned

Mind you the car I have now certainly gives the 911 a hard time.:diablo:

So does mine, but only in the mud!

Tillerman.

Hmmm. interesting. In that case all I can say is that they found some way of getting it right with the V6. Quite a complex subject which has dragged us way off the topic of the original thread. I reckon we’d have been better off starting a new thread for this discussion.

Apparently not – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engine_balance#Primary_and_secondary_balance

The V4 with a balancer shaft I was thinking of is the Ford Cologne V4.

More on the V6 – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/V6_engine

At a guess I would say the V6 has natural balance too if the smoothness is anything to go by.

A straight 6 has perfect primary and secondary balance. I’m pretty sure a V6 hasn’t but I don’t know for certain.

A straight 4 is not perfectly balanced but is usually acceptable up to a limit of around 2 – 2.5 litres. A V4 is always lumpy. Somebody built one with a counter-rotating balancer shaft to minimise the problem. Sounds an expensive way to make a bad engine layout work when it might have been better to use a different design in the first place.

Years ago a mate had a V4 Lancia which was quite smooth but it was a very narrow angle – 13° rings a bell but I wouldn’t take bets.

Edit: wiki says 13° with later ones slightly narrower and the final 1600 only 11°.

I reckon I’d have to agree with you there mate. For some reason the straight four has always seemed smother than a V4 (or is it just me) Whilst a V6 always seems smooth and unflustered by comparison. Strange as it may seem I’ve never noticed any difference between a straight 6 and a V6 for smoothness but a V4 just seems lumpy somehow.

Yes, the Pinto certainly wasn’t a lightweight engine. You could easily carry a CVH engine (which eventually reached 2.0 litre capacity) on your own; you couldn’t do that with a Pinto!

The CVH had many design features I liked, particularly the ‘efficient’ locations of the oil-pump and distributor, but it had many faults also (especially early on). The more traditional design of the Pinto just seemed to work better.

The in-line four-cylinder is certainly the better bet. I’m not sure I’d have even started building V4 engines, whereas a V6 is a beautifully balanced thing. 🙂

That’s what I thought too…..originally Essex 2.0 V4, 2.5 and 3.0 V6…..Cologne 2.0, 2.3 and 2.8 all V6, but apparently the Cologne V4 (in 1.2, 1.3, 1.5 and 1.7 versions!) came first, in 1962, followed by the Cologne V6 in 1964.

I’d also assumed (pretty much correctly) that the 2.0 litre ‘Pinto’ replaced the Essex V4 (in the UK) and the Cologne V4 and 2.0 litre V6 (in Europe) but hadn’t realised that the Pinto was a European engine first and then was exported for use in an American ‘subcompact’ car (the Ford Pinto).

The most surprising thing is that Ford produced so many different engines concurrently with similar configurations and overlapping capacities!

That would account for the limited usage of the Cologne V4.
Being such small capacity engines the crossflow straights were probably the better bet.

A bloke I used to work with had a Taunus Coupe with a 1300 Pinto. What were Ford thinking? The Pinto’s no lightweight and can’t have had much more grunt than a Kent crossflow.

BMW do something similar, there’s the 520, 523, 528, 530, 535, 540 and M5 at one time they also made the 518.

Hi EN830, have you not missed the letter D after all these models.:diablo:

ATB

Dave

The most surprising thing is that Ford produced so many different engines concurrently with similar configurations and overlapping capacities!

BMW do something similar, there’s the 520, 523, 528, 530, 535, 540 and M5 at one time they also made the 518.

There was an Essex V4 and V6 but, as far as I am aware Cologne only built a V6. Ford Cologne tended to stick with straight 4’s.

That’s what I thought too…..originally Essex 2.0 V4, 2.5 and 3.0 V6…..Cologne 2.0, 2.3 and 2.8 all V6, but apparently the Cologne V4 (in 1.2, 1.3, 1.5 and 1.7 versions!) came first, in 1962, followed by the Cologne V6 in 1964.

I’d also assumed (pretty much correctly) that the 2.0 litre ‘Pinto’ replaced the Essex V4 (in the UK) and the Cologne V4 and 2.0 litre V6 (in Europe) but hadn’t realised that the Pinto was a European engine first and then was exported for use in an American ‘subcompact’ car (the Ford Pinto).

The most surprising thing is that Ford produced so many different engines concurrently with similar configurations and overlapping capacities!

Creaking Door, I think you may have misread mate. There was an Essex V4 and V6 but, as far as I am aware Cologne only built a V6. Ford Cologne tended to stick with straight 4’s.
I do wish SAAB had never changed their logo. It was, at one time, the silhouette of a head on aircraft which always struck me as being very much like a Beaufighter with SAAB arranged like a rainbow over the top. Much more appropriate than the present one.

I’m sure some people will say that it is the best car they owned, but the Fiat Multipla has got to be the ugliest car ever made. Ney, the ugliest man made object on the planet.
It is ugly from the 5 visible sides, so underneath must be quite something.

I cannot believe that such a drawing board atrocity was allowed to leave Italy, famous for producing attractive looking “Stuff”. I can’t believe a person actually living in Italy, surrounded by attractive “Stuff” even conceived such a munter of a thing.

A Camel is a Horse designed by a committee, the A400 is a C-130 designed by a committee, the Multipla is a mobile toilet designed by a blind committee and then aborted.

PS. I really don’t like that car.

But, don’t get me onto big box Volvo’s, or rather their drivers.:mad:

I don’t think we’d ever have guessed that you didn’t like them but I have to agree with you. My immediate thoughtthe first time I saw one was that it was the worst looking machine ever built. I think the inside of a combine harvester would look pretty by comparison.:D

Nothing too special owned by myself – just a series of Fords starting with Escort XR3i then a Mondeo SI and ST200. Currently got St220 (in black) which is excellent and is a wolf in sheep’s clothing (as the muppet in a saxo / chavo with a big exhaust / roof spoiler found out when trying to go round the outside on a roundabout in a bus lane)

I’ve been thinking about this for a couple of days, knowing something didn’t sound right.

The Essex V4 and V6 are Ford from start to finish, the V6 originally being designed for the Transit. Saab fitted the V4, bought from Ford, when their old two-stroke was no longer acceptable.

Yes, now that I think about it, I’m sure you’re right about that…..I think my judgement must have been clouded by the fact that I’ve only ever seen one Ford V4 engine ‘in the flesh’…..and that was in a very old looking Saab.

There is a surprising amount on Wikipedia about Ford engines:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Ford_engines

Didn’t know there was a Cologne (Taunus) V4 and an Essex V4 (I thought there was only an Essex V4)…..or that the Cologne V6 was developed from the Taunus V4! :confused:

Spent ages reading that last night…brought back many happy memories…

…I’d forgotten all about the Cosworth Cologne V6…only ever fitted with automatic transmission…what were Ford thinking! 😀

£140 an hour? Ouch. I thought that the 20000 service on my C3 was bad at £154 but at least that included 2 year check on the AirCon and replcement of the Aircon coolant.

I used main dealer servicing when I first acquired the 530i, however, since the warranty has long since run out, I take it to a third party service centre who charge a lot less than the £140 an hour the dealership does.

He also looked after the 968 when I had it and didn’t do a bad job.

Talking of Porsche’s where’s the picture of that 911 Norman D Lands ????

Couldn’t agree with you more…..my beloved Granada 2.3litre V6 estate had the Cologne engine. 🙂

Didn’t think the 2.0litre V6 Cologne was ever available in the UK.

Both the Essex and the Cologne engines had their faults, in the case of the Cologne it had three exhaust valves per cylinder bank but only two (equal sized) exhaust ports from the cylinder head! An awful bit of design work on an otherwise perfect engine…..finally got fixed on the 2.9litre version which I think Ford still use in the Galaxy.

Happy days! 😀

If the Cologne 2.0 litre was never available over here it was the UK’s misfortune. IIRC the UK used a 2.0 litre V4 which was somewhat lumpy by comparison.

Most sensible buyers will accept a logbook stamped by a local independent and evidenced by the invoice.

Mrs Ps Citroen C3 is serviced locally at about £120 per time, as compared to the inevitable £300+ from Marshall’s Citroen (I think we subsidised the Vulcan for a couple of years)

With 6 services since we changed I find it hard to imagine that it will fetch £1,000 less than one with a dealer service history, being that its worth is around £3,000 at best.

Moggy