1992 Ford Fiesta Reviews - Page 3 of 9

1992 Ford Fiesta LX 1.1 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.1 Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 10 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.5 / 10
Distance when acquired92000 miles
Most recent distance96000 miles
Previous carDaewoo Espero

Summary:

A good all-rounder

Faults:

Nothing major whilst I have owned it.

Slight oil leak (not uncommon for an older car)

Boot lock seized.

General Comments:

What a sweet surprise this car was!

I was used to driving a luxury car before this one and I can honestly say this thing keeps up with it!

It is reliable, starts first time, every time.

Very comfortable, even my passengers have commented on the comfort.

Surprisingly spacious. This is down to the lack of any fascia and plastic running down the middle of the front!

Its not very powerful in 4th or 5th, but will run (eventually) quite happily at 85mph.

Great for carrying loads... just put the back seats down!. I got a drum kit and lighting rig in happily with two passengers!

Tank of fuel will last 350miles approx.

Insurance was strangely high for a 1.1!

It doesn't like getting too wet!!

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

Review Date: 20th March, 2004

1992 Ford Fiesta Popular - 1.1 1.1 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 1.1 Manual
Performance marks 1 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 4 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 6 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
4.3 / 10
Distance when acquired65000 miles
Most recent distance70000 miles

Summary:

A painfully slow, cheap frustrating car

Faults:

Nothing too bad.

Steering failed (loose bolt), start-up motor failed.

General Comments:

Although I didn't expect speed for a 1.1 engine, this car is just ridiculously slow. Overtaking becomes a very daring stunt, a couple of times I've attempted to over take a vehicle only to realise the car just won't go fast enough... never even think about going in the right hand lane on a dual carriage way.

It's highly frustrating to drive if ever you want to get somewhere fast, I recall crawling up a small hill at 45mph with my foot to the ground... screaming at it to go faster and hitting the steering wheel (that's probably why it broke)

On a flat road with no hills, the top speed is about 75... I can get 80 out of it if I start swearing at it.

I really hated this car, from the manual choke, manual need for correcting indicator, no central locking, no Intermitant speed of windscreen wiper... it is just a very cheap car.

Very basic interior, there's not even a glove box.

The worst thing is, for all this slow slow speed...it's not THAT good on petrol. My recent 1.6 Toyota MR2 is about the same on fuel if driven at the same speed!

The best thing about the car is the full beam light is good...

If you're looking for a cheap 1.1 car that's low on fuel, you can do so much better than this! A rover 100 for instance outperforms this on every level.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 14th October, 2003

24th Mar 2004, 05:38

You had a duff one. A 1.1 Fiesta will do a ton. Did you ever service it?

6th Jun 2004, 18:03

Why did you buy the car if you were so unhappy with it?it's a cheap car, its not pretending to be a jaguar is it!

30th Jun 2004, 02:01

^ Insurance dictated no Jaguars.

I've found out that despite the 1.1 badge at the back, the engine is in fact 1.0!

12th Jan 2005, 09:10

Why did you buy it if you weren't happy with it? I think to be fair, he wouldn't have known how bad it was, and to now it was bad, he would have had to own it, which he did, and knows how bad it is!

The case of the engine is interesting: Weather you have the 1.0 or 1.1, they're both rubbish. I used to have an E reg Nissan Micra with 130k on the clock, and that would totally obliterate even 1.3 or 1.4 fiesta's. The 1.1 or 1.0 didn't stand a chance.

30th Mar 2010, 03:10

Oh crap, I need a car and quickly... it's the only thing I've found for sale on my budget...

Bye bye my 2.0i petrol.

Sob!

1992 Ford Fiesta Olympus 1.1 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.1 petrol Manual
Performance marks 4 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.3 / 10
Distance when acquired103000 miles
Most recent distance104500 miles

Summary:

A cheap, reliable runaround

Faults:

So far I've only had to replace the choke cable and get a new tyre.

General Comments:

For a first car it's great.

Performance is pretty poor, but it's to be expected of an 11 year old car.

Handling can only really be described as numb.

Good economy although the engine sounds really harsh. This seems to be the case in most mk3 Fiestas.

I'm now looking to replace her soon, but I can't decide whether to get a Punto Sporting or Saxo Westcoast. All opinions on these cars would be greatly appreciated.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 26th September, 2003

Average review marks: 7.0 / 10, based on 29 reviews