Original V6 vs the 'new and improved' MK2

[ant_v6]

Its well known that the original V6 was slated for being underpowered and had seriously dodgy handling. Then the new one came along and it got a good reception – the handling now safer and some extra oomph. But is that the whole story?

I can't help thinking the first V6 is better looking albeit not the interior which is even naffer than the one in the newer car. Are they really so 'night and day' in the real world or is it just a lot of drivel spread about by journalists who don't really know how to drive?

It was something that was said to me at the Lotus garage the other week when my car was in for some work; they said my suspension settings were perfect for the track and totally smooth tarmac but verging on dangerous for the road. The car set so low and hard that it will give very little chance to correct mistakes. I know what he meant but I find the car fine. I give it a lot of respect in the wet though. Made me think about the MK1 V6.

OK, the MK2 is the better car, better handling, a bit faster, probably better equiped and the interior is not so s**t looking but is the MK1 such a bad car? With nice ones costing £12k they look really good value. Is a MK2 worth another five grand?

 

[steveV6]

Is a MK2 worth another five grand?

Yes!!!!






.....and no, lol.

The Mk1 is the more entertaining to drive, but the Mk2 is the all round better car, all IMHO of course.

P.S. I've owned both so this is an owners judgement.

 

[ant_v6]

In what way was the MK1 more entertaining?

 

[clarkiev6]

my rear wheel tracking was a mile out and the mich tyres where crap...
i have sorted both and do run over 300 bhp with the Nos on...she handles well once you learn the car..
i have sprinted her and done 60 laps of castle combe and around 30 laps of bedford autodrome... MK1's RULE OK!!!!.......LOL..
MK2 is a namby pamby car which is too easy to drive...

 

[ant_v6]

But is the MK1 a rattle box?

 

[Dash]

As Steve says above the MK2 is an all round better car.

I think the so called twitchiness branded on the MK1 gave rise to its entertaining qualities.

Still have reservations as to the experience of some of its critics. Mention twitchy before you test drive a car and twitchy is how you will find it.

I got used to the handling style of the MK1 very quickly and after a few ermm ok lets not do it like that moments

When the suspension is sorted on my MK2 I hope to be 100% in favour of this softies road racer.

 

[ant_v6]

so is the suspension on the MK1 too hard? Does that mean it crashes and bangs over pot holes?

 

[Dash]

When pushing the MK 1 it can flip away and you are suddenly facing the past. Must admit you have to be a total lunatic or a skin flint with tyre replacement to get it unsettled. The MK 2 has sponges for dampers and needs the travel slowing down/stiffening. Just my own opinion though I am no technical guru.

My MK1 stuck to the road like glue even at naughty speeds, so much that I had in the past reported it to be quite boring, but that was just after I had the hop skip and jump 172.

 

[_Tom_]

I've not driven a mk 1 but every review I have ever read about the car has said that in comparison to the mk 2 it is a handful.

Whilst people say that the mk 1 is more entertaining, I would personally prefer a car that won't bite you in the ass.

My mk 2 handles amazingly. In my opinion it handles better than the 172 cup that preceeded it. The only time that I have ever unsettled the mk 2 is when being forced to lift off mid corner to avoid a granny that had decided to use a blind bend as a crossing point.

 

[137699]

I've not driven the mk2, but I can say (having owned 2 escort cossies in the past) that the mk1 vee is the best handling car I've had - in the dry at least.
I pay it respect in the wet, and do not go even close to pushing it round the bends, but in the dry, I've never yet had any hint of losing it.

I personally think the press got it very wrong, or drove early/prototype versions which were perhaps not sorted.

I would say that you do have to learn how to drive it properly though. It's not the sort of car you can jump in and drive fast first time (well I couldn't anyway!).

As for hard suspension, I find it surprisingly refined. My old Astra GSi crashed over bumps far more than the vee does!

For anyone considering a mk1, but worried about the reports, I'd say drive one first, then make your own mind up!

 

[Fred@BTM]

the mk1 and mk2 would be much better with harder suspension, and slammed about 12inches

 

[PaulMc]

It's not just about handling differences beween the MkI and MkII, it's more about what happens when you get to and beyond the limit of adhesion and chassis dynamics. From what I read, the MkI is not progressive in it's 'break away'. Once you have reached chassis and tyre limits it will snap instantly and is then near on impossible to 'catch', if at all.
The MkII on the other hand has much, much better chassis control and higher levels of grip. Once these limits are reached the MkII will give a warning on what's about to go wrong and can still be controlled and steered predictably if the driver is quick enough and read the situation early enough. But the MKII does give you that option that the MkI doesn't.
However the MkII as the MkI will still bite if stupid, as can any RWD performance car.

For me the MkII makes for safer driving on a day to day basis, I am guessing and hoping that in emergency situations it is more predictable and controllable in any avoidance situation.

All IMHO