|
The Transit 2.5 went with that galumphing eagerness Transits go with.
|
|
I've decided to abandon this post for the time being. My attempts to eliminate the first sentence have all been rebuffed. Had me in fits of laughter.
|
|
I'll have a glass of whatever you're drinking ;-)
|
|
...and the rest of us at least mildly intrigued !
|
|
I think the first post is a line from a Bob Dylan song. No doubt all will become clear.
|
|
If he'd had a few more beers it could have been the new Eminem single.
|
OK. The Transit galumphed to London and bulged over tiny, expensive Kensington parking slots. The steering wheel was at the wrong angle and the engine was a bit coarse but the thing empty went like a rocket with lots of lumpy torque. Transits have always been ace vehicles and this was just another. Ran over a bottle or glass in the gutter in Portobello Road but the tyre didn't deflate. Took it back to its base somewhere up behind Kentish Town Road. Had to get a bus to Islington, a sporting rattling single decker bounding over the speed bumps in Agar Grove, bad cess to them and all who love them.
Came back in a Honda CR-V, a capacious almost new vehicle with all sorts of bells and whistles but an engine called a dcrvdts or something like that. No idea of the engine size but perhaps not all that huge because strangely lacking in torque for a modern turbodiesel. It hated running below 2000rpm but was red-zoned from 4500.
It also sounded dieselly and loud for a very long time. However, once in its preferred rev range, properly warm and at decent road speeds, it was very refined and quiet and became frisky at proper speeds, creeping up from 65 to 75 silently and somehow unnoticeably. Also when properly warm, which took a long time, its quietness meant that in the gears it would quickly reach the red zone. I didn't stray into it.
54 miles and a bit of London weren't enough to learn to drive the thing properly and economically. It's a very nice car if you aren't in too much of hurry. Quiet chassis, comfortable elastic well-damped suspension, no handling vices apparent at sensible speeds. A feeling of very high engineering quality. But a V6 petrol one might be more my sort of thing in the long run if I could afford that sort of car.
|
>> Transits have always been ace vehicles
In the interests of strict historical accuracy I have to mention a Luton-bodied non-turbo diesel Transit that was pretty awful, and an early petrol Luton that came fresh, or rather not fresh, from the hands of some sort of large-scale fish handler, with fishy water sloshing around in the box sections, no kidding. Just the thing for shifting a sofa and child's cot.
|
|
That journey must be one of the great expeditions of all time, it must be almost 20 miles, and hardly in a remote area.
|
Don't be snooty ON. 54 miles of mixed SE roads that I know well, but difficult usually to do in much under 2 hours. Could be done in one, just, late at night, before speed cameras.
You know quite well I wasn't claiming some big achievement. Just talking about two turbodiesels.
|
Had another pootle in the Honda today, fetching some bits of furniture from a store 5 or 6 miles away. Only got caught out by the massive drop in torque under 2,000rpm once or twice, instead of all the time last night when I was a bit knackered.
The engine is 2.2 litres. No bhp figure is given in the owner's manual apparently. But there's a lot of stuff about how incredibly green the thing is. That sort of engine management programming could easily account for some of the lack of smoke-belching low-down grunt. I imagine it has a dpf, but I also imagine that it isn't one of these crap ones that give trouble.
It does seem odd to me though that the 2 litre petrol Chrysler Cruiser has far more torque low down than this bigger-engined diesel, although the Honda may weigh quite a bit more. You can drive the Chrysler gently on the flat at less than 1,500 rpm in top gear. At those revs the Honda has fallen right off the cam.
It really is a very nice car. Satnav and audio tiptop. Glass roof. Carrying capacity of a small van. Very quiet, very refined. I don't think I want one myself but must say the car makes me respect the name Honda. The CR-V should be an important contender in its market.
|
Someone who can write well and likes Hondas...
I don't believe in re-incarnation!
John
|
|
That sounds like a reference to the great L J K Setright
|
I didn't see that one coming. Setright also liked Citroens and Bristols, as I do (and did before I ever heard of LJKS). Indeed he turned me down for a job as a technical writer for some outfit in Soho before he was known as a motoring writer. Said I could do the work but would quickly become bored. Perfectly nice well-conducted person.
He had good taste in horseflesh and didn't get things wrong, but his writing was often a bit on the purple side for my taste. I also wondered sometimes whether his claims of 76mph cross-country averages in the fifties or early sixties could be a tiny bit exaggerated. Even a racing driver would be pushed to do that except down a straight bit of road with no hazards to speak of and no holdups at all.
|
I'm a Transit fan too, before they went FWD though.
Tough, very hard wearing with usually unburstable engines indeed drivetrain's.
Designed to be abused by proper geezers, road and building workers not known for the finer points of driving or mechanical sympathy...if the thing don't do the job come hell or high water it's no good to them.
I covered thousands of miles in them in the early 70's, V4 petrols, Perkins plodders and the later 'York' 2.4 Diesels which for a NA 4 pot Diesel had excellent torque and whilst not quite as fast as a good petrol version would pull well up to the governed 70ish...needed a hell of a battery to start it though.
Putting a Luton or Box body on them ruined them completely, not only by wind drag but the handling went to pieces too.
I drove i think it was TAR969M regularly, a blue twin rear wheeled 35cwt petrol that went like hell, would cruise all day at 80 and when empty could outhandle a good car of it's day.
Oh and SNK179J a twin wheeled petrol flat bed where i first learned to rope and sheet before i gained a proper truck licence, it was the gaffer's first new van and had benefitted from a monthly change of Duckhams 20/50...went on to astronomical trouble free mileage.
(Wonder why i can remember those reg no's?)
Cut my teeth on London dels in those vans, racing the other traffic on the Finchley Road, as was the way of the time.
Had a regular 1am flyer down to Exeter to W Weddell the meat wholesaler, and bottle tops to Chivas whisky distillery in Paisley (not on the same day).
I like Honda's a lot, not too struck on the design of the most recent CRV with it's regrooved grille treatment good car though it doubtless is, i prefer the chunky design of the previous model one of which my lad owns.
Enviable reputation for quality which i hope they don't rest upon too much as some other makers have.
Diesels that don't pull at all engine speeds frustrate me no end, i preferred old mechanical pumps one could give a little more fuel to via the fuelling screw, transformed many a sluggardly beast into a driveable chariot.
Last edited by: gordonbennet on Fri 24 Dec 10 at 19:34
|
>>V4 petrols,<<
One of - the 'all time' worst engines ever built, in my not-so humble opinion.
|
>> One of - the 'all time' worst engines ever built, in my not-so humble opinion.
>>
They weren't so good in the cars, but in LC tranny!? form we never had any trouble with them at all.
Incidentally me mate Dougie and i cured many a V4 prone to blowing head gaskets...slide 3 ft scaffold pole onto tommy bar and get Dougie to pull as hard as his 15 stone could go, they'd never leak again.
Stick another 2 cyls on the end though and you had a cracking engine...so long as the oil drive didn't round off..;)
|
|
The V4 engine used in the Saab 96 was a good'n, as was the German built lump (probably one and the same)
|
>> The V4 engine used in the Saab 96 was a good'n, as was the German
>> built lump (probably one and the same)
>>
Herself had one of those, it was no bother. Taunus engine I believe, rather than the Transit V4.
That car was great in the snow. Much better than any other front wheel drive cars we've had. Or maybe it just turned me temporarily into Erik Carlsson.
|
>> Herself had one of those, it was no bother. Taunus engine I believe, rather than
>> the Transit V4.
The Engish V4, and V6 was known as the Essex.
|
>>Taunus engine I believe,<<
Ford Taunus, that was it Manatee ~ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taunus
|
>> I'm a Transit fan too, before they went FWD though.
>>
>> Tough, very hard wearing with usually unburstable engines indeed drivetrain's.
>>
>> Designed to be abused by proper geezers, road and building workers not known for the
>> finer points of driving or mechanical sympathy.
and Bank Robbers. Revolutionised the world of crime.
and Bands
Every band in the UK at some time or other schlepped up and down the M1 in a transit.
|
I drove hired Transits from the word go. The early ones had a 1600 or 2 litre Cortina pushrod uniits. They went like the clappers, about 90 downhill. The V4 ones always sounded not long for this world. How many main bearings did the poor things have? 3 if they were lucky. Anyway they didn't sound good. But they too could do 90 when pushed.
The late rear drive transits had single-leaf springs. Always thought them dodgy although I never heard of one breaking.
These modern diesels, front drive, are good too. I don't think I've had one up to 90, the modern world being so mimsered up, but I bet they can do it.
I agree with gb in spades on the awfulness of Luton bodied ones with any power train. Apart from being huge brick-shaped lumbering creaking things with nothing to recommend them but volume, they tended to catch on the scenery in close manoeuvring. But they were always dented up on the front corners and gouged down the sides, so the hire people didn't always notice.
I must say I would have expected people to be more interested in the Honda though. What a pity the conditions have been too good to call on its trick transmission, and that I am too good a driver to have needed its emergency brake assist or other idiot-saving devices. I toyed with the idea of triggering one on purpose. But it isn't my car.
|
>>I drove hired Transits from the word go<<
Did you ever get to drive the 3 ltr V6 tranny Sire, they went quite well,
although I much preferred the Bedford CF 2.3 jobbie, even with a Luton body stuck on it.
I tuned many a CF based campervan/motorhome - nice.
|
|
Bedford's 5 speed box in the CF was a jolly wheeze - first was "1 back" and reverse with was "1 forward" concentrated the mind somewhat at traffic lights...
|
>>Bedford's 5 speed box in the CF was a jolly wheeze - first was "1 back" and reverse with was "1 forward"<<
Same as the Datsun 160J SSS, alas :(
|
|
Never did Perro, nor did I ever drive one with double rear wheels. Mainstream all the way, alas.
|
>>and no holdups at all.
>>
Suspenders.
|
>>Someone who can write well and likes Hondas...
I don't believe in re-incarnation!<<
You don't have to. I've actually got a Prelude...and I nearly bought a Bristol two years ago...
Thanks AC, by the way. I've thought once or twice about having a CRV that's a few years down the road and not the ugly one. But it certainly wouldn't be an oiler. Season's greetings!
|
Sussex - Islington - Sussex. Two turbodiesels. - Armel Coussine
