My new Fiesta one month on - report

Yep when I reved it today the engine had been running for a good 30 mimutes and there was a lot of heat coming from the vents, so I assume the oil would have been upto to temperature by then.

 

yeah, maybe you need to get used to the clutch a bit more too - it'll be best if you go somewhere where you'e relaxed and have a play....but with me - yeah, more revs and the harder I pushed the less acceleration I had...when that haqppens it best to gently ease you foot off the pedal...

when I git my new clutch - I stalled it a lot (hadn't realised how bad the old clutch was before it actually broke), but now the acceleration's spot on...

 

Yep your biting point would have been a lot lower wouldn't it? Mine is fairly near the top but I have driven worse. This is all apart of the reason you buy a banger for your first car though, better to reck clutch on an engine which is probably one of the most simple ever than one of these modern stupid dual flyweel things.

 

Yes, thats right AT.

If its biting really high and starting to slip, you need to get it sorted........before that 1 in 4 hill (= lots of roast chicken)

 

In whichcase i'd say its on borrowed time.

Might be decision time for the car?

 

My dads is the same though, fairly at the top (he has the same car pretty much) and he has done at least 15,000 miles in it like that. I will have a play tomorrow and see exactly where the biting point is.

At least now its running if I decided to ditch it then its worth something, but then I see its not using any oil, there is no smoke at all at idle there is quite a lot of good stuff about it. So its if a new clutch, new rollbar bush and eventualy brake pipes will cost more than a new car which will also have issues.

The bottom line is the chasis, I am pretty sure the engine will last, I need to take some more pics from underneath but this whaty I have so far.







Now if the chasis will last another year or so the repairs are worth it, but if the chasis won't even last till Mot in May then its not.

 

yeah, I had my car serviced and the mechanic said the clutch was on it's way out - but it drove fine, and for some 25k before slipping..

 

If those pictures are the worst it gets, then I wouldn't panic too much.

Try making sure it's all dry, and there is some integrity to the joints, i.e. not just a couple of cm of rust an nothing else.

Next, put some decent quality, high viscosity, water-resistant grease on there and all round the CV boots too. In fact every vulnerable bit, except the face of the brakes, on or round your exhaust or other hot bits.

:inferno::inferno::inferno::inferno:

This will prevent it rusting up too much and will stop too much mud sticking to the struts, which also causes rusting.

Try:

http://www.motuk.co.uk/mot_testing.htm


The MOT isn't rocket science, as pointed out earlier, it isn't really about mechanical fitness. It is just about ensuring your vehicle meets the minimum safety standards. We are talking major chassis rusting, holes in columns or mounting areas that cause failure. Not a but of orange on the sills. Look under most cars, horrible.

 

Yeah thats a bit diff though mr c.

ATs is slipping now (?) a bit.....and biting high.

If theres no sign of slip I agree..... could just be a high clutch /half way worn.

But like i say you don't go far minus your clutch. Unless you fancy matching gears AT? (ie clutchless driving.)

I ve been all the way upand down most boxes like that for the hell of it (thoiugh not this transit) but its not some thing I'd want to be forced into

 

"The MOT isn't rocket science, as pointed out earlier, it isn't really about mechanical fitness. It is just about ensuring your vehicle meets the minimum safety standards. We are talking major chassis rusting, holes in columns or mounting areas that cause failure. Not a but of orange on the sills. Look under most cars, horrible."



You reckon?

Surely cars are tons better than they were....

When i was a kid in the 70s, you saw some real deathtraps arouind. Victors/cortinas with holes in wings etc

You don't see it now.

(IMO) a ten year old body shell is usually as good new..... or often is?.

 

I remember it well, I was a kid in the 80's and I remember at primary school I used to watch the cars go by. About half the cars you used to see were Datsuns and MK2 Escorts with different colour wings, in fact odd wings were very common back then. Also holes in the wings were common.

There is a tiny rust spot on the body work but if the car lasts and passes the first MOT I will treat that.

I saw a lot of the car underneath when my mecnanic jacked up so he could remove the wheel tray (freebie) and it did look fairly bad but nothing worse than the pics above. I have also lifted the carpet up a bit and from what I can tell the floor is very solid.

The sills are also solid, but I am not expecting them to last for two years or anything, all I want from this car is another 6 or 9 months motoring anything else is a bonus.

 

Yes the 80s were aturning point i think.

The mk 3 essies were much better and my mk 1 astra was very good. Such a pity i rolled it.....but there you are.

We ran as a family car an old volvo 145 estate. By the time it had to go (85) it looked like a collander. It was a '71 (g plate way)....early days of monocoque construction when the answer to no seperate chassis was just masses of metal. So the volvo was built like a tank.






Nowadays of course fuel efficiecy is a major issue so weight is also.

My transit is made out of tin foil.

 

I bet you find that volvo actually weighs a lot less than a modern hatchback, David... weight is a major issue these days, unfortunately for thw wrong reasons! (eg a Focus TDCI weighs more than my old 5-series..)

 

1) hmmmm.......interesting to prove one way or the other

the volve came in at about 1,5 tons IIRC

in its latter days 18 to the gallon was your lot....round the lanes.



2) wrong reasons??

 

Wrong reasons - unnecessarily dull dynamics, performance, resources consumption, increased fuel consumption. Mostly driven my making cars larger than they need to be, especially bolting on stupid size wheels for styling-driven reasons (yes cars are better than they were, but imagine what they could be!)

PS even the later 240 Estates only weighed in at 1260Kgs... the VW Beetle is a tubby 1550kg. Go figure.

 

ok, you win

the volvo came out at about 1202kg

a 2.0l vectra about 1300kg

surprising....maybe because everthing has put on weight over the years.....longer....wider especially (as you say)

compare a modern polo/golf with the origionals

 

My Fiesta weighs 950kg, it has small 13" wheels (not alloy) and an iron block up front which may explain some of it. But it is still heavy for a small car, I suppose the airbag, side impact bars, ECU electronics, seatbelt gas all add weight.

I drove Clio III on my learner car, it had a 1.2 16v engine and that seemed really heavy, must have weight at least 1200kg if not more.

 

Look at the size of those tyres (165s) on the volvo.

Compare with the monsters on a mondeo (195s...225s?).

Thats partly where the weight has crept on I suspect.

 

1080kg for the 1.2, I think it's an illusion with that car as the thing is really well sound damped and has a very solid feel to it.

I'm amazed that the new Fiesta has lost 40kg

 

Use of aircraft style composites, the Clio III had lots of plastic panals to keep the weight down, yet it is still a 5 star NCAP car.

On my generation Fiesta they used fairly heavy steel to acheive a decent (for the time) NCAP rating. Also the iron block must weight a bit more than modern engine with alloy cylinder heads.