Jump to content
nealpina

Ford Cortina MK IV 2.3 Ghia or a E21 323i as a daily

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, NWJW said:

  

 The 2.3 had, I think, 125 bhp vs the 100bhp of the 2.0 but the thing with the Cologne engine was how it delivered it's power, it had bags of low end torque so felt very punchy (not too dissimilar to a modern-ish turbo diesel).

I have them at 102 and 109 but the 2.3 as 68kg heavier. Hence there is very little difference in bhp/tonne.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, whiskychaser said:

I have them at 102 and 109 but the 2.3 as 68kg heavier. Hence there is very little difference in bhp/tonne.  

 

 There seemed to be two different versions of the 2.3, a standard compression type and high compression type, I don't know for certain but I've read that the Cortinas, Granadas and Sierras were fitted with the higher compression engine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, NWJW said:

 

 There seemed to be two different versions of the 2.3, a standard compression type and high compression type, I don't know for certain but I've read that the Cortinas, Granadas and Sierras were fitted with the higher compression engine.

I think you may well be right. Wiki suggests that it is possible to determine which one was fitted by the colour of the rocker covers. Of course, that doesn't allow for someone painting or changing them in the last 40 years :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Azmontana said:

E21 over a cortina all day long. I think you lot are on the wrong forum. 

 

Nope and nope.

 

We are all secret Ford fans on here and would actually all rather own Fords if they did a sensible rear wheel drive car, but they don't so we have to plump for a Beamer as a) we aren't old enough to drive a Merc and b) don't play golf so can't have a Jaaaaaaaag 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Azmontana said:

The fact that you’d prefer an old ford to an old beemer tells me you’re definitely old enough to now be driving mercs. 

 

Bolloxs!;)

 

Whats not to like about the "old Ford", it has a V6 petrol engine and is rear wheel drive?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 535i Andrew said:

 

Nope and nope.

 

We are all secret Ford fans on here and would actually all rather own Fords if they did a sensible rear wheel drive car, but they don't so we have to plump for a Beamer as a) we aren't old enough to drive a Merc and b) don't play golf so can't have a Jaaaaaaaag 

 

 'Tis true, for many years after passing my test all I really drove were Sierras and Granadas before making the shift to an e39,  if Ford had kept with tradition and made the Mondeo rear wheel drive I'd have probably never bought an e39. :grin:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 535i Andrew said:

 

Bolloxs!;)

 

Whats not to like about the "old Ford", it has a V6 petrol engine and is rear wheel drive?

 

Never said I don’t like old fords but my preference will always be a beemer then and now. Although now I do prefer mercs and Audis to beemers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎31‎/‎07‎/‎2019 at 20:46, whiskychaser said:

Was curious about the power difference between the 2.0 and the 2.3 Cortina. If the stats I found are correct, the 2.3 only had 0.3 bhp per tonne more. At 176nm, it did have 7.5% more torque though :)

 

 

Yes was aware before I started the tread, but a V6 is a V6  :P, and 2.3 was top of the range 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, NWJW said:

 

 There seemed to be two different versions of the 2.3, a standard compression type and high compression type, I don't know for certain but I've read that the Cortinas, Granadas and Sierras were fitted with the higher compression engine.

 

12 hours ago, whiskychaser said:

I think you may well be right. Wiki suggests that it is possible to determine which one was fitted by the colour of the rocker covers. Of course, that doesn't allow for someone painting or changing them in the last 40 years :)

 

 

What will be the actual difference in driving pleasure be between standard and high compression?

 

Also does that mean only Capri had the standard compression?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Exactly is the way it goes about being an engine.  Who cares that you can get twice the bhp from the small Cologne from a turbo'd 4.It's much smoother than any four pot can ever dream of being. 

 

The Colognes and Essex V6s were really torquey lumps for their rated BHP outputs. On a decent engine for every one bhp an engine produces it should give you  one lbs ft of twist, my N62 E60 333bhp and 330lbs ft of twist.

 

 These old V6s better that ratio and they were designed using slide rules not computers!

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, nealpina said:

 

Yes was aware before I started the tread, but a V6 is a V6  :P, and 2.3 was top of the range 

IMHO, it is very subjective. If you like a V6 and you like pushrod engines, this is the very fellow for you :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎31‎/‎07‎/‎2019 at 07:37, pauliexjr said:

I was all geared up to get the 2.0 version of this as a company car back in 1982 (the year they stopped making them) after I had written off my MkII Cavalier. I was in hospital for two weeks and on crutches for another six before returning to work to find my brand, spanking new.........Cavalier MkII :-( 

 

Turns out our accountant, who organised the company cars, hated Fords and insisted on Vauxhall as he bought the best ones off the company when they came up for sale! 

 

In the mid noughties the company that I worked for had mixed fleet of Ford and Vauxhall.  The early Vauxhall were better than the Fords.  After 2007 everyone wanted the Ford.  Only time when Ford IMO were playing catch-up to Vauxhall.

 

Due to the front wheel drive setup even today Ford and Vauxhall, and the quality of interior they're on the same par; and it comes down to preference of looks etc IMO  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As a kid it was all fords (family had escort mk1, 3, 4 & 6, fiestas mk 1 & 3 capri 2, cortinas 3-5, sierra etc)

 

But my driving experience is of 80s Vauxhalls and Fords and i reckon at that time car for car the Vauxhalls were a bit better.

 

My Astra GTE mk1 was way better than my my mums xr3's, that CVH was a course old lump and my Nova 1.2, 1.3SR and GTE's (Sr was better IMO though mine had a cam and weber) were better than the equivalent fiestas with their push rod kents or again the CVH

 

The GM 1.8 OHV was a cracking lump and the 2.0 in the  Mk2 cavalier really flew. Oddly every 1.6 i drove was a bit flat.

 

Yes FWD but at the time i felt the Fords where old tech.

 

Mum later had a Mk6 escort 1.6 16v that was horrid!

 

Then came the Focus and Mondeo's which turned the tables again.

 

What i would say is whatever your view and preference we are all looking back with rose tinted spectacles! :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, nealpina said:

 

 

What will be the actual difference in driving pleasure be between standard and high compression?

 

Also does that mean only Capri had the standard compression?

 

 I doubt the engines would feel all that different, the high compression engine may feel a bit more eager to rev but I doubt there's a huge difference in the power delivery.

 

 We only had the 2.8 and 3.0 engines in v6 flavour in the Capri in this country and as far as I know the 2.8 engines all had the same compression ratio, the 3.0 was available in low and high compression but it was only the Transit that was fitted with the low compression version (I think).

 

 How do I know all this crap......?:lol:

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Because its what we do :lol:

 

I remember pouring over the Cortina Mk V brochure when my dad was choosing his next cortina KNT 13 W if i recall 1.6 GL in meadow green which he debadged as just after he got a promotion which meant he could of had the 2.0!

 

I recall the colour names like Fjord blue, terracotta, signal yellow and that the GL had pads in the headrests where as the L just had hoops.

 

The GL the steel minilite look rims and the L the slotted steel etc :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×