You wrote:
>
>Ah, thanks for the info on the two engines. I certainly agree about
the
>Pinto transmission - which is exactly why I ultimately decided to stay
>with the Alpine engine, because I really like the feel of the Alpine
>transmission - tight, well defined gates, firm and smooth. Besides,
for
>all the years I drove the car, it was what connected me to the engine
and
>sort of defined the car for me.
>
>You know, I did hear that the Capri transmission, which also came with
the
>2.0 and was built in Germany, was a great transmission. I have never
>driven one. Any input on that?
>
>
In the UK I had a Ford RS2000 (ralley style old style Ford Escort - not
seen in the US), powered by the 2.0 engine. A nice revver, about 105 hp
(in the UK), nice 4 speed (but a little slower through the synchro than
some newer transmissions - but only for the real sports shfters). This
engine has a lot of performance potential.
In the US I had a Mercury Capri (1976 German built import) 2.3 powered.
The engine is a good solid puller (sold it with 140000 miles and didnt
burn a drop of oil), but not quite the revver the 2.0 was. The gearbox
was as good as my old UK Ford. Again a bit slow through the synchros,
but tight, good synchro. In comparing the box on my Alpine with the
Capri, I would have to say that there was not much between them. If
anything the Capri might win.
Incidentally, did you know that Holbay have performance goodies for the
2.0 Ford engine.
John
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Sep 05 2000 - 09:23:09 CDT