Your starter for ten!!!

I would chose a farina every time and bear in mind that i do have a 1971 Hillman Hunter as well 1800cc that gos like a rocket but it aint screwed together like an A60!

While not wanting to criticise your choice of classic except in fun, or in a discussion in the relative merits of similar cars, you *really* need to get things into perspective. Your car is a death trap in an accident compared to any vaguely similar sized modern one.

Autocar road test 1962 gives 0-60 time of 22.5 seconds for Cortina

1200.21.4 seconds for A60.The respective top speeds were given as 77 and 8O mph so the Cortina was hardly a dragster.Maybe you were thinking of the 1500GT?.I owned a Corsair 1500GT for several years which was in effect a lengthened and reskinned Cortina-it was a good looking car and was ok to drive but the gearchange was inferior to the Farina,the gear ratios were bad-a huge gap between 2nd and 3rd,maximum torque was produced at 3600 rpm making it not very flexible around town.What really let it down though was the appalling cheap interior finish-the tacked on rev counter was particularly awful and it's overall feel of being built down to the lowest possible price-the car had no real boot floor-the top of the fuel tank had to form the floor-how cheap can you get?Also a starter handle would have been useful as the starter motors used by Ford were hopeless and it could take ages to get the thing going on a cold morning.

I see your point but only to a point, I could say if i had head rest i might not of got whip lash E.T.C but what worried me and always has is getting in a crash and the metal crumpling in and trapping me in, i surpose things depend on the type of crash as well and i understand a lot of damage can be done to a persons car that does not bend abit. But i was still thankful i was in my Oxford that day sadly the car was a complete write off.

The message from snipped-for-privacy@aber.ac.uk (ANDREW ROBERT BREEN) contains these words:

My 1979 (T) Range Rover had a starting handle. No idea when (or even if) the item was discontinued.

Roger

On the track I have seen two cambridges hit head on at a combined speed of about 70, the drivers were still ok and the cars were back out for the destruction race at the end. Maybe modern cars are safer, but I find that a heavy car usually wins. I also think that older vehicles are usually driven less recklessly and are therefore in less accidents. Rather like motorcycle outfits, I know they have all but disappeared now, but when they were current they had the lowest insurance costs of anything, simply because they were so seldom in accidents.

mrcheerful

It is in the low speed shunts where you see the difference. Someone reversed into the front of my Triumph 2000 in the car park at work one day. I had a front bumper misaligned by 3/16 inch. His Mitsubisi cost £1500 to straighten out. Also, some years ago, a Marina driver didn't quite stop before he hit the back of my P4. I had a dent in the back wing about the size of my little finger. He had to get out of the passenger door because his front wing had crumpled and was preventing the driver's door from opening.

So, yes, if you have a serious accident or hit a tree or a lorry, then an old car will not protect you like a new one will. But the majority of shunts are relatively low speed or a glancing blow, and in those cases, you are more likely to be able to continue your journey in an old car than a new one.

Jim

Wonderful description! But why did I get a picture in my head of Rowan Atkinson saying it, I wonder?

Jim

That reminds me of when I was a young teen, going with a group of mates to watch the local fairground being packed up and driven away. Seven of us pulling on a tug-of-war style rope tied to the starting handle eventually managed to start a huge AEC lorry. We earned a shilling each for that.

Jim

I admit to say, he has to be an inspiration for any such descriptive semi-rant :)

It was somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold. I remember "dilbert" saying something like:

I agree with all of that.

Utterly awful shitheaps that deserved an early death.

The supply of rose-tinted spectacles around here seemed to have reached saturation point.

I'll go along with that. Had a 1934 Packard straight 8 once. A r/h drive import. Weighed well over 2 tons. (awful petrol consumption) I had to stop a bit rapidly in traffic once. Guy behind went straight into the back of me. Hit my bumper hard enough to crush the front of his car, and drive the radiator onto the fan and engine. Damage to my car. Only a few scratches on the bumper itself. On another occasion a driver coming out of a side turning, caught my rear wing. Crushed his front n/s wing, and headlight, and tore his front bumper off at one end. My damage. A shallow dent in the wing. A very easy repair by a mate who was a panel beater. I know modern cars are safe, but I think a very strong heavy car is safer. IMO colliding with my old Packard in a modern car, would be like colliding w ith a lorry. The modern car would come off worst. Mike.

I baught a Cambridge once. Was attracted by the apparent comfort and build quality. Awful thing to drive. Gutless and wallowed round corners like a barge in a high sea. Quickly got rid of it and baught a 1200 Cortina instead. Was impressed by it's roadholding. Only a little less gutless than the Cambridge, but the roadholding persuaded me to change it for the GT version, which I was quite happy with. Road tested at 96mph!! And really quick into the bargain. :-) I would have preferred the Lotus version but I couldn't afford one of those. :-) Mike.

worth owning the engine was much more robust.

The GT was a better car to live with than the Lotus --- what a heart breaker.

I think what is happening in most of the prangs described here is the newer vehicles crumple zones are doing all the work for you - ie absorbing all the energy of the collision instead of half.

This is the urban 4x4 mentality - a heavy 'car' will always come off best in a low speed shunt. Unless it hits another heavy car - or truck - or even something solid like a wall.

If I ever have to have a major accident rather than just a bump, I only hope I'm in my new airbag equipped car rather than my 'classic'.

A pal of my brother *won* a new Cortina 1200 in a TV quiz show. At the time, I had an MG Magnette ZA. And that Cortina would out accelerate the ZA - which had an engine in excellent condition. The figures suggest this is nonsense - but it did, and by some margin.

Fix, fix !..... :~))

There is two ways of looking at this, one way is to strap the occupants in tightly, as they do in racing cars and allow the body to absorb a few 'G' as it tries to carry on moving as the car comes to a sudden stop or the second is to allow the car to crumple and stop gradually - in practice both methods have to be used in the everyday world as you can build a large enough crumple zone in the size of an average vehicle and most occupants either won't accept being strapped in like a sports car driver or would not be able to stand the forces applied to them in a sudden stop.

The problem today is because people don't think they can be injured or killed if they are involved in a crash, so in one way older car designs although not safe in a crash are safer due to making people aware of the dangers IYSWIM.