Comments on: Astra GTE vs Escort Rs Turbo Fifth Gear Feb 09

By: cammymcghee

cammymcghee — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:21:00 +0000

wot about the astra …
wot about the astra vxr much quiker than the ford focus st

By: puredead77

puredead77 — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:21:00 +0000

the escort wins …
the escort wins hands down in looks, quality, and speed vauxhall are there is not one vauxhall i would prefer over the equivelent ford

By: jhl1981

jhl1981 — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:20:59 +0000

Hey cammymcghee …
Hey cammymcghee check out fifth gears video of the focus st vs astra vxr (nurburgring edition) more power apparently? and the vauxhall still gets beat they have great engines but look and handle like

By: CreditMunch

CreditMunch — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:20:59 +0000

Depends what you …
Depends what you mean by good. Have a good look over (and under) both and you’ll see.

My money would be on the VW still being around in 10 years still looking timeless in it’s design.

The badge snobbery issue is rubbish. Fords are built to be sold at discount in high numbers in order to lead the market sales position (not bad, but in IMHO they are not as good as VW’s, although the gap is certainly narrower than it used to be be).

I’m not ill informed and would rather have the Passat.

By: CreditMunch

CreditMunch — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:20:59 +0000

RST S2 for looks …
RST S2 for looks and quality? Er, yeah right!

S1 for Looks = Definately.

Escorts were hardly quality made.
Vauxhalls of that era were generally better made and faster than equivalent Fords:

Ford CVH engine = rough as nails, not very powerful (only turbo was when tuned but unreliable), 100k miles = dead.

Vaux/Opel Family 1/2 = More BHP/torque, loved to rev, easily lasted over 100k.

Mk1 Astra 1300s revved to over 7,000 rpm without fuss and walked all over equivalent escorts.

By: stevelomas123

stevelomas123 — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:20:59 +0000

The RS turbo is not …
The RS turbo is not standard! would never be as quick as an astra valve!

By: CreditMunch

CreditMunch — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:20:58 +0000

Er no, the CVH was/ …
Er no, the CVH was/is rough as nails. Ask anyone who knows a thing or two about cars. Better still, go and drive one on the limit – they sound horrendous.

The Kent X-flow on the other hand was/is a fine little engine.

Corrections: Early Family 2 1.6 = 90BHP
Best 1.6 CVH for BHP was late MK4 XR3i = 108BHP / XR2i 110BHP

CVH was consistantly criticised for NVH problems. The Family 1/2 was in mine and very many people’s opinion a better engineered engine.

By: DeanBufton

DeanBufton — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:20:58 +0000

…they worked hard …
…they worked hard to improve this and by 1987/1988 they were on par with Ford. The build quality on the Mk4 Escort is no worse or no better, than the Mk2 Astra. With regards to which, out of the Mk4 Escort and the Mk2 Astra, was better looking? Well, that’s all subjective anyway…

By: DeanBufton

DeanBufton — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:20:58 +0000

…them to a Family …
…them to a Family 2 engine, is a bit silly. For example, the best naturally-aspirated Family 2 1.6 8v of the Mk2 Astra bunch, the 16SV, produced 81bhp and the best naturally-aspirated CVH 1.6 8v of the Mk4 Escort bunch, the XR3i, produced 105bhp. Theirs also plenty of CVH’s being driven around with 100k+ under their belts and and plenty of RS Turbo’s driving around with raised power outputs and good reliability. Vauxhall build quality in the early 1980’s was not as good as Ford, however…

By: DeanBufton

DeanBufton — Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:20:58 +0000

I have to disagree …
I have to disagree with you on on a couple of your points. With regards to the CVH being rough as nails, i can only ume that you’re referring to the rattly top-end sound on some engines. This is due to a design flaw, which doesn’t permit enough oil-flow to the camshaft lobes. As such, this creates high camshaft wear, relative to the rest of the engine and a camshaft on a CVH, should be treated as a major service item. However, to say that they are not very powerful and then to compare…