GTP Cool Wall: 1963-1966 Ford Lotus Cortina Mk1

[Wolfe]

But it isn't.

I'm not saying this to be an ass or to cause an argument, really, I'm not, but most Civics and early Corollas are cooler.

Do we have to scratch at that off-topic subject like this? I'll throw W&N a bone in that with a manual transmission, I'd rather drive a Sunbird like his than any automatic-equipped iteration of the cars he mentioned. Given your position on the transmission subject, Beeblebrox, perhaps you'd agree. Speaking from personal experience, it probably makes all the difference for why he likes the car, as opposed to the pseudo-qualities he usually waves around.

...I know my car isn't fast or cool. All I'm asking is that you recognize that it's cooler than a Civic, Corolla, or other generic I4 compact.

This is actually about the most humble thing I've seen you post regarding your car, and I don't think it's really right for others to kick you for it. But you're just inviting trouble. The thing is, we don't care if your Sunbird is "cooler" than some other cars. That's for you to believe yourself. If you have to ask, you'll get answers, but you probably won't like them. J-bodies are not exactly the most popular car around -- having owned a 4-cylinder BMW, I know what that's like -- so it's wiser not to press the issue like you do.

You'd also do well to quit rating your Sunbird above everything that has at least one quality you don't care for, or dumping on other members' cars for such a reason. You've done that so much that at this point your Pontiac is automatically pulled into almost any discussion you join, and you have to realize it's the sole reason your car gets so much flak. I actually feel sorry for any other member who happens to drive a J-body, considering how much hell you bring down upon those cars in this forum with your boasting.

If you could let us all move past the "Sunbird v. the World" thing, we'd be talking about Ford Lotus Cortinas right now.

 

[Turtle]

Do we have to scratch at that off-topic subject like this? I'll throw W&N a bone in that with a manual transmission, I'd rather drive a Sunbird like his than any automatic-equipped iteration of the cars he mentioned. Given your position on the transmission subject, Beeblebrox, perhaps you'd agree. Speaking from personal experience, it probably makes all the difference for why he likes the car, as opposed to the pseudo-qualities he usually waves around.

This is actually about the most humble thing I've seen you post regarding your car, and I don't think it's really right for others to kick you for it. But you're just inviting trouble. The thing is, we don't care if your Sunbird is "cooler" than some other cars. That's for you to believe yourself. If you have to ask, you'll get answers, but you probably won't like them. J-bodies are not exactly the most popular car around -- having owned a 4-cylinder BMW, I know what that's like -- so it's wiser not to press the issue like you do.

You'd also do well to quit rating your Sunbird above everything that has at least one quality you don't care for, or dumping on other members' cars for such a reason. You've done that so much that at this point your Pontiac is automatically pulled into almost any discussion you join, and you have to realize it's the sole reason your car gets so much flak. I actually feel sorry for any other member who happens to drive a J-body, considering how much hell you bring down upon those cars in this forum with your boasting.

If you could let us all move past the "Sunbird v. the World" thing, we'd be talking about Ford Lotus Cortinas right now.

You're right, that was a dumb and unnecessary comment, and I would also prefer a manual Sunbird over an auto civic or corolla.

W&N, I feel the need to apologize for that comment, it was immature, pointless and just caused trouble.

 

[Roger the Horse]

It also uses an extremely small engine

What?

It doesn't use a large engine, I'll agree, but 1.6 is nowhere near extremely small. 300cc is extremely small, and only if it's fitted in a car*. 300cc would be pretty big in a moped, and enormous in a hedge strimmer. 1.6 is at the larger end of small, at the very least, and in this day and age, where almost every car is fitted with a turbocharger, and those that aren't are supercharged, 1.6 is becoming the new medium sized engine.

*Has there ever actually been a car produced with an engine as small as 300cc? I'm aware of plenty with 360cc or so engines, but I can't name any that are smaller, off the top of my head.

 

[Wiegert]

The Cortina is an odd case - it has enough racing history and famous-driver connection to be cool, but it's slow enough to head toward uncool

Odd to you perhaps. But then you're always one to rate any car on how fast it can be driven, or how many chest hairs you gain from doing so.

It also uses an extremely small engine, which subtracts cool points regardless of when or where it was built, or why.

Extremely small compared to what? An LS7?

There's a hell of a lot more to cars than engine size and output. As ever though, you're clearly incapable of seeing it.

And I know my car isn't fast or cool. All I'm asking is that you recognize that it's cooler than a Civic, Corolla, or other generic I4 compact.

I'll get back to you on that once Joey's nomination is ready for voting. Though it doesn't take much foresight to tell where it's heading in the poll.

*Has there ever actually been a car produced with an engine as small as 300cc? I'm aware of plenty with 360cc or so engines, but I can't name any that are smaller, off the top of my head.

Goggomobil T300, and the even more miniscule T250.

 

[Joey D]

My popcorn is already popping for the Sunbird thread. I foresee it being like camping...in tents.

*badump-tish*

Anyway I have the Cortina a S-Z because it's awesome and even non-car people would like it since it has the same sort of aura that the original Mini has.

 

[FordMKIVJ5]

*Has there ever actually been a car produced with an engine as small as 300cc? I'm aware of plenty with 360cc or so engines, but I can't name any that are smaller, off the top of my head.

Messerschmitt KR200 and KR175, though I'm sure there's been a ton, they're just not too well known.

 

[Wolfe]

Has there ever actually been a car produced with an engine as small as 300cc? I'm aware of plenty with 360cc or so engines, but I can't name any that are smaller, off the top of my head.

An 1898 Renault, a whole bunch of microcars from the postwar years into the beginning of the 1960s, a more recent French microcar, and the VW 1-Liter concept (but not the production XL1).

 

[Roger the Horse]

Oh yeah. 50s microcars. I don't really count those as cars in the conventional sense though. They're more like an intermediate between a car and a motorcycle, especially the ones that lack a reverse gear.

 

[TheCracker]

I've become fairly familiar with Mk1 Lotus Cortinas over the past 25 years, but I've never seen any reference to them having a 0-60 time of over 10 seconds. Period reports have always said between 9.3 and 9.7. I know that's slow now, but even 20 odd years ago, that was reasonable. 50 years ago it was quick.

I find it hard to be objective about the Lotus Cortina these days, but the fact remains that it was pretty much the first homologation special based on an everyday family car. Without it I doubt we'd have RS Fords, M-Power BMWs or AMG Mercs etc etc. So despite any connections I have with the car, it remains subzero.

 

[YSSMAN]

I've become fairly familiar with Mk1 Lotus Cortinas over the past 25 years, but I've never seen any reference to them having a 0-60 time of over 10 seconds. Period reports have always said between 9.3 and 9.7. I know that's slow now, but even 20 odd years ago, that was reasonable. 50 years ago it was quick.

It depends on the class of the car and what it's meant to do. I'd consider 8 seconds to be about average for the course these days, but 10 seconds is more than acceptable for city driving - the main reason why so many of the cars like the Spark, Mirage, Fiesta and so on are advertised primarily for that.

 

[XS]

Whoa!! It finally happened! Even if it happens after this post, it's still a success! I'm not going to say it but you know what I'm talking about...

 

[Azure Flare]

My popcorn is already popping for the Sunbird thread. I foresee it being like camping...in tents.

You brought enough for all of us right?

 

[daan]

Motorsport magazine recently reprinted their original road test of the 1964 Lotus Cortina. I thought it might put all of this into context. Remember that 1964 was before speed limits (out side of built up areas) and it was also pretty much before motorways (although sections of the M1 were opened by then.)

Also note that they say 8.5 to 60.

 

[homeforsummer]

It depends on the class of the car and what it's meant to do. I'd consider 8 seconds to be about average for the course these days, but 10 seconds is more than acceptable for city driving - the main reason why so many of the cars like the Spark, Mirage, Fiesta and so on are advertised primarily for that.

I recall reading that the average new vehicle on sale in the U.S. still has a 0-60 time in the mid-9 second range.

It actually surprised me as I seem to know an inordinate amount of people who won't get out of bed for less than 6, claiming anything slower is dangerous. But if mid-9s is average, anything up to 11-odd must only be marginally below average. It also makes me wonder what the average 0-60 in Europe is - we have a lot of small cars taking anything up to 15 seconds, but a bog-standard 2.0 diesel these days does 60 in under ten seconds, so I'd be surprised if our average is any less than that of the U.S.

It also means this 1960s Cortina is no worse than average. In fact, a little better judging by the test posted by daan above.

 

[niky]

Of all the talk of anything over 10 seconds being dangerously slow, I have yet to see people pull sub-10 second 0-60 acceleration on a regular basis in traffic.

Sadly, get anywhere close to a car's quoted 0-60 time at a stoplight, and, depending on where you are, you'll get a ticket for hoonery.

Whereas a modern city car... you can basicallly rev its nuts off keeping up with traffic, and take every corner at 100% of your tires' capabilities, and the police won't bat an eyelid...

 

[Slash]

Of all the talk of anything over 10 seconds being dangerously slow, I have yet to see people pull sub-10 second 0-60 acceleration on a regular basis in traffic.

Yeah I agree, most people don't do it. You might get the coupe bursts of acceleration, but mainly people do it on the backroads if you've got something worth doing it with. Otherwise, people just drive like you're supposed to.