Hydrolastic or something like that

I think even the metro had more cred than the Allegro

Mates mum had one, but he was mechanic. He took my sister out once on a date in it.,that must been a thrill......


Next boyfriend had mk 1 Mexico, greeny bronze colour with pockmarked bonnet .Amongst others

 

metros are ****, the vw is a far better car. this is common car knowledge

 

Hydrogas was on the Metro and Allegro (gas/fluid system)
Hydrolastic was on the likes of the Mini (rubber ***** basically)

 

Er they weren't tinny, quite the opposite, the doors on my Mark 1 used to shut with a lovely 'thunk' and you could lean aganst any panel without fear of it being dented as a result.

Security was crap but it was on most cars of the time.

The brakes were much improved by a bulkhead brake mod and a bigger master cylinder. You could then change the dics, pads and calipers if you needed to go further.

 

Nah, you're deluded. They were utter sh1te on wheels and anyone who owned one may as well have worn a placard saying 'I am a bell end' around their neck.... just saying

 

In your opinion. In my opinion the Metro wasn't bad as people made out and the Golf was overrated, I never said the Metro was better than the Golf. I have based my opinion and thoughts through first hand knowledge and experience not on the crap the motoring press and the genral public spout

 

I think the metro turbo was cool, and as said above the golf was overrated, not doubting it was a good car, just overrated.

I remember a guy used to fly around our estate when i was a kid in a mk2 gti in red, i wont of even been ten years old and i used to think to myself "what a shed" then a few years later my sisters friend had an rs turbo in red and it went past me on full chat and i was in love with it.
Hence why i think the golf is boring.

I bet i know which felt faster out of the metro and the gti

 

im not a particular golf fan either and i have never owned a golf or a metro.
but i have been in both and the metro is a cheap nasty badly built shed that i would have no desire to own if i could drive back when they were available.

 

nevermind all that. In the film he said the golf was a mk2 8 valve. When you look at it though it had the roof mounted aerial which was a feature of the 16v, the 8v had the aerial in the front wing (as per http://www.vwgolfmk2.co.uk/wp-conten...1/mk2_golf.jpg)

 

You've been smoking more crack than the Mayor of Toronto if you think the Austin Metro was even close to being on par with the VW Golf, you just need to look at where the two companies are now to see how well each car was made.

Ohh BTW I had one, a Metro that is.

 

You must be sitting too close then because I haven't said that! People put the Golf on a pedestal but the fact remains they are just an overpriced hatchback with slighter thicker metal than it's competitors (the Metro NOT being one of them!). They don't have a particularly great reliability record and don't excel in any area. Of course the remains of BL would never survive but by that you could say that any car company that doesn't exist any more made terrible vehicles! The fact that all the major French manufacturers are still running shows you can still build crap and be competitive. If you are comparing 80s hot hatches then the MG Maestro Turbo
as bad in places as it was would beat the golf in 8 or 16 valve form.

 

P.S. Mk1 and 2 Golfs were extremely reliable, it was only in the 90s that VW started to lose the plot reliability wise!

 

Bollocks, they were no more reliable than anything else. You lot have been sucked in by the VAG marketing men. I've had several Golfs Mk1s and Mk2s neither of them have been any more reliable than other cars I've owned and in some cases some of the most unreliable vehicles cars I have ever owned!

Anyway let's get back to the point, Top Gear didn't fail in expectations to be another self indulgent piece of amateur dramatics.

 

I owned 2 Mk 1 Golfs and my mates had several Mk2s. All were uber reliable.

Maybe your ability to look after a car matches your ability to decide what is a decent hot hatchback!

 

So you will not be watching it next week then?

 

I loved my metro turbo! Kept up with xr3i's and xr2's no probs.
In fact in the two years I owned it I didn't have a single issue with it,, I drove it like I stole it too.
Have owned a mk1 gti which I liked a lot. Lovely little car and obviously prefer it to the metro.However golf gti's IMO have gotten worse with every model. heavier slower each time.
Apart from the mk1 and maybe mk 2 the golf gti is mega overrated,too heavy, too expensive and too slow.

 

In fact I'd go as far as to say apart from the mk1 and mk2 calling a golf gti a hot hatch is like calling a Porsche 911 a supercar, IMO of course.

 

The current GTI is a hell of a lot quicker than a mk1 or 2. So is the mk5 and 6. How is that slower?

 

The mk5 hits 60 in 7secs, only 2 secs quicker that a 1.3 metro turbo haha

 

Just checked the mk6 has a 7 sec 0-60, lame considering it's the mighty gti.

 

not exactly a hard thing to do..........

my 18 tonne forklift at work would probably pull away from either of them

 

Regardless of everyone's opinions on the current format of Top Gear, it seems to have started an interesting / entertaining discussion about hot hatches of yesteryear ! Gets the thumbs up just for that IMHO.

 

i like top gear,its a laugh on a sunday night before another 6 days of work start.there is nothing else to watch on a sunday night so may aswell watch 3 middle aged men smash things up

 

Good for you, has it got a dump valve
In the late 80's early 90's the xr2, rs turbo,xr3i, GTE's,fiesta supersports ect were all classed as hot hatches and were all cars to own back then, by today's standards most are/were ****e but netherless all hot hatches.

 

haha no but it has a sun-strip

i had a couple of xr2's and they were fun to drive like a little go-kart but the xr3i................what a pile of ****e that car was.

 

top gear is now no more than childrens television, 3 blokes fooking around and making ***** of themselves, no real automotive journalism anymore, and thats what they should be doing.

 

Haha, FairPlay buddy
I do agree the xr3i was a bit pants

 

The fact that a 1.4 Nova Sri was quicker up the hill that the golf GTI says it all. Über reliable golfs maybe but heavy it was and quick it was not.

The 80/90's hot hatches were fiesta Rs turbos, Renault 5 turbos, Peugeot 1.6/1.9 GTi's, uno turbos etc. Nova SRi really? What about the Nova or Astra GTE?

The series has been going downhill for a while. Way to scripted and ending up like clarksons stupid dvd's. Yes I still watch it but only to see how worse it can actually get. Same producer for 21 series, time to give him the boot IMO.

 

Sorry you are wrong, hydrolastic was used on the Mini from aound the early 60's and was liquid (green in colour) based - it used a concept of "displacers"

the Rubber ***** (actually cones) were developed by Moulton (of the bikes fame)

this gave rise to the conecpt wet or dry based Minis - in reference to the suspension setup used

dry was always reckoned to better - and nerd in me will tell you that the Cooper S changed from Dry to Wet in about October 1965

The "displacers" used on the Cooper S where off course uprated and could be identified by a different colour band

 

I remember back in 1985-6 being jealous of a student with a Metro. He was at Birmingham Uni when a mate of mine was there and had won it in a competition. He used to park it outside the Student Union building.

It was a 6R4.

I'm still jealous now.

I also remember a chap I worked with who had various MG Montegos. One of them wouldn't start one night after he'd been to the pub, so he got the AA out. The patrolman told him his "ECU had gone".

Asking if it could be repaired, he was informed it was doubtful, because when he said it "had gone", he meant someone had actually nicked it! Great security in those days.

I didn't much like Top Gear last night, but it's still much better than watching 'Giving Birth on Sunday in Colour' on the other side, which Mrs O watches.