1989 Ford Sierra L D 2.3 diesel
Summary:
A good all rounder, seriously cheap
Faults:
Nothing so far, fingers crossed. I carried out a full service, as it had been off the road for 4 years before I bought it.
The gearbox synchro is getting weak, probably because of the necessity of thrashing it in the intermediate gears to make satisfactory progress.
General Comments:
This was bought firmly as a cheapy banger, and in this respect it excels. I am not someone who is happy to pay out £200 a month on a new car just to watch it depreciate.
Mine is one of the last fitted with the 2.3 Peugeot engine before they went to the 1.8 turbo Ford motor. It's pretty damned slow to tell the truth; my '92 Golf 1300 will leave it for dead, but this is only noticeable on the hills. For everyday driving it's fine, returning 45 mpg.
The cabin is basic, being only an L model, with manual windows and sunroof, but it's a comfy place to be, and any driver can find a comfortable seating position.
It's an easy vehicle to service and maintain; there isn't even a timing belt to worry about.
Mine has fared better than most with the rust, as it's spent most of its life in sunny Spain, but still has the odd rusty bit on the doors- still has its original sills though.
I would recommend one to anybody; there were enough of these around in the '80s, so they can't be that bad. They suffer a poverty spec image these days, when even Mondeos can be picked up for a couple of hundred quid, but I prefer the Sierra, a much more satisfying car.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 20th July, 2007
18th Sep 2007, 22:06
Quite right. but then if I DID care what anyone else thought of my car, I would be driving something newer. Truth is the only person who cares how new/fast/expensive your car is, is you. Hardly seems worth it, does it? Oh look, the 250th 07 plate BMW 3 series I've seen today... yawn.