BlueInGreen44 wrote: Pushes 40 on the highway if I don't drive faster than 70.
Video of a 1st gen Escort going over 70mph or it didn't happen... 
BlueInGreen44 wrote: Pushes 40 on the highway if I don't drive faster than 70.
Video of a 1st gen Escort going over 70mph or it didn't happen...
In reply to Leafy:
The Miata gets poor mileage due to its design. Open top cars with soft tops are very bad for aero, whether the top is up or down. Also the gearing of the Miata is great for a sports car, not so much for good mileage.
The fact that the Escort with the same motor gets better mileage is a testament to what engineering can do when the requirements are different.
Klayfish wrote:BlueInGreen44 wrote: Pushes 40 on the highway if I don't drive faster than 70.Video of a 1st gen Escort going over 70mph or it didn't happen...
That's in reference to a 2nd gen. Which I should have specified... My bad.
Leafy wrote: In other words, its not a honda.
Thankfully.
(I say this as someone who likes and respects some Hondas.)
RoughandReady wrote: When I saw that the later model GT's came with Mazda twin cams, I thought: "OOOOOOOo." But blue ovals scare me, and I'm not sure what to think. I don't know anything about these 1.9's. What's it like to live with? Slow, miserable, death trap?
The twin cam in a 1st gen Escort was a Lotus.
I started leasing Escorts in '82. Since my terms of use were limited to 2 or 4 years I found them to me acceptable transportation. I think the '86 was the worst. Every body says how great the Mazda engined GT was. 4 yrs and 47K miles the clutch started slipping just before the lease ran out. Never was abused. My 2000 ZX2SR was the best of the bunch. After the lease ran out I bought it. Had it for 10 yrs. and 75K miles. It had the ZETEC engine and it was abused.
As a counterpoint, we beat the holy dog E36 M3 out of our 93 EGT with a $75 parts store replacement clutch for about 50k miles and it never once thought of slipping.
Still looked like it had tons of meat left on it when i gave the whole shebang to a Festiva owner.
My Chump team ran an incredibly ratty 2nd gen Escort Wagon with an Escort GT engine swap. It wasn't straight line fast but it had upgraded front brakes. It could out brake anything on the track. Quite a few competitors had scary lock up scenarios when trying to brake with that car at the end of the straight. The best passing technique in it was
This car always finished. It was overheated on track at least twice. It didn't have a tach so we revved until it wouldn't accelerate or hit the rev limiter.
Wow, lots of hate here. My 1st Gen experience is with an 86 EXP...great little car! Popped a head gasket due to me not changing it when it started showing symptoms. Don't sit idling in a drive thru during a Texas summer with a wore out water pump!
Got it to 127 mph once! Drafting behind a Camaro that was tucked in behind a Corvette. With an 85 MPH speedo you gotta do the math with the tach!
Parts are kinda scarce and I have several 2nd gen Escorts with the 1.9. This is a different engine than the pre 91.5 GT 1.9s.
Overheating can warp the head, but on the 1.8 if you break a timing belt you bend valves!!
Can't really remember the gas mileage on the EXP, but I suspect not so good as I Hooned that thing around like a go-kart.
My current 1991 Escort is possibly an anomaly as it has 387,000 miles on it and gets 33 mpg delivering pizza and over 50 mpg on the highway. But it is a "Pony" or the stripped model with a taller 5th gear and absolutely no options whatsoever.
Bruce
egnorant wrote: Wow, lots of hate here. My 1st Gen experience is with an 86 EXP...great little car! Popped a head gasket due to me not changing it when it started showing symptoms. Don't sit idling in a drive thru during a Texas summer with a wore out water pump! Got it to 127 mph once! Drafting behind a Camaro that was tucked in behind a Corvette. With an 85 MPH speedo you gotta do the math with the tach! Parts are kinda scarce and I have several 2nd gen Escorts with the 1.9. This is a different engine than the pre 91.5 GT 1.9s. Overheating can warp the head, but on the 1.8 if you break a timing belt you bend valves!! Can't really remember the gas mileage on the EXP, but I suspect not so good as I Hooned that thing around like a go-kart. My current 1991 Escort is possibly an anomaly as it has 387,000 miles on it and gets 33 mpg delivering pizza and over 50 mpg on the highway. But it is a "Pony" or the stripped model with a taller 5th gear and absolutely no options whatsoever. Bruce
No you don't. BP is non-interference.
I had severial 87 wagons. Great for what they were. I would rock snother one if it came up.
Swank Force One wrote:No you don't. BP is non-interference. Always thought they were...just checked several references and you are correct sir! Thanks! Bruce
egnorant wrote:Swank Force One wrote:No you don't. BP is non-interference. Always thought they were...just checked several references and you are correct sir! Thanks! Bruce
De nada!
This just sticks in my head because i won a bet over it when the belt snapped on our EGT at about 4000rpms in 2nd gear. (Previous mechanic did an awful install, left bolts rattling around in the timing cover. Shredded belt.)
Good old boy insisted i needed a new motor because "All Ford dual cam motors are interference," and refused to grasp the concept that it wasn't a Ford motor. ("But it says Ferd right on the cam cover, dammit!")
Ended up in a $100 bet.
He ended up paying for the parts and beer for everyone.
Why the hate on Mk I (Mk III in Europe) handling? The cars were state of the art for small cars at the time and could handle great. I don't see how they are better or worse than other similar cars from the time (Mk I / II Golf).
Because the camber can't be adjusted on the US versions unless you buy the special adjustable strut tops from Ford (or you went at the front end with a die-grinder or built your own slotted strut tops). So you're left with positive camber on the front and terminal understeer.
My wife's first car was a Escort Pony that I was going to improve a little for her as a gift. Went so far as to buy some nice lowering springs and wider tires when I realized I'd have to convert to power steering or she would kill me since it was already horribly heavy (even for me) to try and park the damned thing. Then I was looking at the suspension and realized there was no way to adjust camber and after looking around, found that Ford sold special "crash repair" strut tops that would allow you to adjust the camber to something reasonable.
At this point, the headgasket was on its way out and parts of the body was starting to fall off, so we passed it on to someone else before it became a huge money pit.
Adrian_Thompson wrote: Why the hate on Mk I (Mk III in Europe) handling? The cars were state of the art for small cars at the time and could handle great. I don't see how they are better or worse than other similar cars from the time (Mk I / II Golf).
The American Escort was similar to the MkIII in the same way that a Chevy Cavalier is similar to the Vauxhall Cavalier. You can tell that they share a lot of similarities in design but that is about it.
EvanB wrote: At first I thought you were talking about the actual mk1 Escort and thought "are you serious?" Then I realized that you meant the first generation in America...
Me too.
RoughandReady wrote: When I saw that the later model GT's came with Mazda twin cams, I thought: "OOOOOOOo." But blue ovals scare me, and I'm not sure what to think. I don't know anything about these 1.9's. What's it like to live with? Slow, miserable, death trap?
I'm a little biased, as I own 5 bg chassis (2nd/3rd gen escorts and 1990-1994 mazda 323/protege) but I figured I'd give my opinions.
First gen escorts (North American 1st gen, that is) suck. The gt's were ok, but everything else was junk. And even the gt's had issues, such as dropping valves. And they handled horribly.
Second gens are WAY better. They're actually great cars. Especially the gt's. All second gen escorts are pretty reliable (my uncle had an lx with the 1.9, and it had over 300,000 miles. Still the original unrebuilt engine, trans, clutch, and many other things. Finally rusted out to the point that the rear strut went through the back window. Got over 40 mpg with it.)The gt's are very good, with the mazda bp's. They handle good, get good mileage, and make decent power. And it's hard to kill them. The only weak point is the transmission. I've been racing a variant of the escort, a protege lx, with the bp engine, and it does pretty well. The engine has 195,000 miles on it, but still has plenty of power. I used to run an escort pony and I had many good finishes with it. It lacked power but I got it to handle like it was on rails, and passed people through the corners. And it would handle anything I threw at it, including running without any coolant for 15 minutes of racing (radiator broke and couldn't see the temp gauge. Finally finished the race and noticed the thing was dripping coolant. lol. Replaced the radiator and raced it again for a year or two. Also ran it out of oil once after busting the oil pan, and ran it like that for 5 laps, and that didn't stop it either. Finally decided to upgrade to something with more power, and that's where the protege came in. I did very well with that car. My grandpa races an escort gt, and he's had very good luck with them as well.
3rd gen escorts are good, but not as good as the 2nd gen, in my opinion. The 2.0 spi engines had valvetrain issues, and the zx2's didn't have the top end power the 2nd gen gt's did. They do have some torque though. The zx2's don't handle as well (the exception is the zx2 s/r. They handled very well) compared to the 2nd gen gt's, due to the 13mm rear sway bars on the zx2's, and they are a bit heavier. (I'm guessing it's from the extra safety stuff and accessories.)But you can install the 2nd gen gt's 21mm rear sway bar, and then they handle a bit better than stock. Still have issues with the transmissions, as they share transmission parts. But other than that, they are pretty good.
You'll need to log in to post.
