1976 Ford Cortina XL 1.6 O.H.C. Pinto

Summary:

The original design is unique

Faults:

Vacuum pipe did not work, causing car to stay in first gear, right after car was delivered. Local London garage tried to rip me off, saying it was the gearbox. Other local London garage (Portuguese) fixed it for nothing.

Needed new tyres.

Needed floor pans welding.

Panels need welding/repairing.

Dreaded Ford rust.

General Comments:

Bought this Cortina as a practical/nostalgia buy (my dad was a sales rep with Cortina/Granada's), and being an artist I needed a cheap but different car, and Life on Mars helped! (you impressionable fool).

It's a roomy car, feels spacious compared to today's low-roofed cars with their cramped interiors.

The car looks great, understated, compared to some of today's cars, spot on.

Front seats a little uncomfortable/hot in warm weather.

Smooth engine on A roads, reliable, tough engine, no break downs, (although can be poor to start if not used on a regular basis), but sluggish by today's standards.

I paid a lot for mine, £2500, but these days you have to take what you can find, and also it's the post face-lift version, better dash, square head lights e.t.c, one of the last Mk3's made so it's quite rare.

I don't like the performance, but I want to keep this fairly original, so upgrades will be kept minimal. I love it.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 11th February, 2010

30th May 2023, 16:46

Father had a couple of these as well back in the day. Rust aside, they were good cars for the time.

1979 Ford Cortina GL 1.6

Summary:

Looks great, drives great, but make sure you get a good one

Faults:

Starting problems, thermostat issues and a very temperamental automatic choke. Parts are difficult to get hold of now. Just got a new exhaust for mine and it pretty much had to be custom built because they aren't available as a complete unit

General Comments:

Lovely to look at, fun to drive, but too many reliability issues mainly due to the infamous Ford Automatic choke. Handling is OK, performance is 'leisurely' but it sounds great - really sporty. Very comfortable and quiet for a 1.6 and soooo retro! Would make a nice usuable classic but make sure you look for a good well looked after example otherwise your in for a lot of problems and big bills

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 21st December, 2006

31st Oct 2007, 13:40

I agree, these cars do look great. See one now next to all the modern cars & they look absolutely superb.

25th Feb 2024, 17:08

They still look great in 2024. Unlike the early 80's Sierra which looks like jelly mold.

1980 Ford Cortina L 1.6 petrol

Summary:

Very practical and versatile

Faults:

Cassette ejection button malfunctioned at 46,000 miles.

Head gasket blew at 52,000 miles.

Heater failed at 55,000 miles.

Clutch plate broke at 60,000 miles.

Gear selector mechanism broke at 63,000 miles.

General Comments:

The Cortina had a number of mechanical and electrical faults.

But it was still a very good car, considering its age and mileage.

I did get frustrated by high fuel bills and disappointing performance.

It proved itself a very practical family car thanks to its cavernous interior and boot space.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 15th April, 2006

1967 Ford Cortina 1600 E 1.6 petrol

Summary:

Super reliable workhorse

Faults:

Rust had started to appear on wings soon after purchase.

Interior was rattly and got damp easily.

Ignition failed after 85,000 miles.

Engine ceased up after 91,000 miles.

General Comments:

Generally very reliable, but in the end was really showing its age inside and out.

Engine was faultless until it ceased up and I sold it to a mechanic for £10. He did up and I saw it on the roads for a good few years afterwards.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 27th February, 2006

1964 Ford Cortina GT 1.5-litre petrol

Summary:

WRX of its day, but with 1960's lack of durability

Faults:

Brake pads and linings faded and needed very frequent replacement (front, 5,000 miles). Early model had manual rear brake adjustment which meant climbing underneath, but automatic adjustment on later models over-reacted on hot drums and left brakes stuck on the next morning. Back to the drawing board! Ferodo hard pads/linings solved the problem. Clutch burned out after 12,000 miles, changed four times, before finally changing for heavy-duty type. Manual clutch adjustment could be a little inconvenient at times of heavy percipitation. Front struts bent and once one came out of its housing on rebound and through the wing after a bad bump. That aside, reasonably reliable.

Door sills and rear valance prone to damage. Car was very light (paint shell with metal sprayed on?) and cracked over rear axle.

General Comments:

Back in 1964 this was the Impreza WRX of its day. Usual story of company using owners of new model as unpaid testers and avoiding warranty where possible. In those days, warranty was one year, 12,000 miles.

Rear leaf springs too soft, and needed changing for estate model springs. Petrol tank prone to damage, but Ford offered tank shield which solved the problem if you used high density foam between. Eight-gallon fuel tank meant carrying two 4.5-gallon jerry cans if you were driving all night.

No engine problems, but needed Duckhams to reduce oil consumption after 20,000 miles. Castrolite turned to consistency of water after 50 hard miles and oil pressure dropped from 40 to 20psi.

Handled surprising well considering the tyres were so narrow (155x13).

Fortunately there was a wide range of uprated parts available. Just as well as in many area the standards parts were totally inadequate. Final drive was a bit high for anything other than A-roads. Fortunately differentials in range of ratios were available for some Stg.5.00 from breaker's yard. Very easy to work on. Very cheap and nasty interior.

Went round corners reasonably well. Stopped well, but only with DS11/VG95 brake material. No fuses, but never a problem. Dynamo and small battery meant you had to be aware of load.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 28th April, 2005