XR the Performance Fords 0947981012, 9780947981013

Citation preview

XR THE PERFORMANCE FORDS XR has become.a badge of distinction among saloon car enthusiasts. Ford chose it to identify the performance variant of their first front-wheel-drive Escort. That car, the XR3, has become the most successful of the modern ‘hot hatches’. It was followed by a smaller brother, the equally entertaining Fiesta XR2, then by the luxurious ‘biplane’ Sierra XR4i. In spring 1985 the XR4i became the XR4x4, Ford's first production four-wheel-drive car and a tempting combination of high performance and amazing roadholding in a practical bodyshell. This book brings the full story of the XR Fords together for the first time. It tells of the developments that turned the XR3 into the XR3i and the firstgeneration XR2 into the new model with the CVH 1.6litre engine. The role of Ford’s ‘secret weapon’,

Special Vehicle Engineering (SVE), is revealed; in particular, how they adapted the high-performance Sierra to four-wheel-drive. It is a fascinating and sometimes complicated story

involving engineers throughout Europe. Every XR Ford owner will benefit from knowing how his or her car came into being. Profusely illustrated, the book includes comprehensive appendices providing production details, specifications and performance data for the European XR models.

Author Jeremy Walton is a freelance writer with a special affection for hot saloons. He has raced them,

tested them, and written about them for more than 15 years. His journalistic and driving assignments have brought him into contact with all of the XR series during their development and he has used examples of each for extensive mileage on the road.

Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2023 with funding from Kahle/Austin Foundation

https://archive.org/details/xrperformanceforO000john

XR THE PERFORMANCE FORDS

To: Barry Reynolds, who had the idea, and John Blunsden, without whom the idea would not have been published. . .

XR THE PERFORMANCE FORDS

JEREMY WALTON

a4 MRP

MOTOR RACING PUBLICATIONS LTD Unit 6, The Pilton Estate, 46 Pitlake, Croydon CRO 3RY, England

ISBN 0 947981 01 2 First published 1985

Coypright © 1985—Jeremy Walton and Motor Racing Publications Ltd.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of Motor Racing Publications Ltd.

Photosetting by Zee Creative Ltd., London SW16 Printed in Great Britain by Netherwood, Dalton & Co. Ltd., Bradley Mills, Huddersfield, West Yorkshire.

Contents Introduction Acknowledgements 1 The badge of distinction XR Fords from three continents z Escort XR3 Performance in a front-drive package 3 Fiesta XR2 Federal and racing heritage + Escort XR3i A little ‘i’ can mean so much... 5 Fiesta XR2 again CVH power and a fifth gear 6 Sierra XR4i The biplane with three doors 7 Sierra XR4x4 97 SVE applies the Ferguson Formula 8 X-rated action Behind the wheel of the performance Fords 113

Appendix 1 XR Ford sales in the UK Appendix 2 Technical specifications of XR Fords Appendix 3 XR Ford performance

125 126 128

Introduction This book is designed to record and portray the range of XR cars offered by the Ford Motor Company. Naturally the facts of their mechanical layout are included, but we have also tried to provide an insight into the pleasures and pitfalls of ownership and an indication of how the cars feel, and look, in action.

Whilst the book concentrates on the European Fiesta, Escort and Sierra XR performances, for the record J have also included an explanation of the role played by the American Mercury Cougar XR-7 from the 1960s and the South African XR6 Cortina/Sierra, plus their fearsome Sierra 5-litre XR8. The author hopes readers enjoy the contents of this book as muchas he has enjoyed over 50,000 miles of XR motoring. Any constructive suggestions for improving future editions will be gratefully received, aside from a change in authorship. . .

January 1985

JEREMY WALTON

Acknowledgements Ford XR models seem to raise enthusiasm within the industry, as well as

from customers. I simply could not have had more willing co-operation from all concerned, although the XR4x4 was still on the secret list when

this was written. Although the idea for the book came from a Ford of Britain press officer [Barry Reynolds] I must stress this is in no way a ‘Ford book’. The contents have been originated independently, with facts, rather than opinions, checked with the British side of the company. Editorially Iam indebted to members of Ford’s press service in Britain, Germany and America for facts, or access to facts from engineering sources. The bulk of the factual material concerning the cars and their development came from the Special Vehicle Engineering group [SVE] based in Britain under the managerial care of Rod Mansfield. Other sources at SVE are mentioned in thetext, including the man who now takes overall responsibility — and who tells us the story of the Sierra XR4i’s birth — Hans Gaffke. For cars that appeal to a younger owner than average I went to a magazine born in October 1983, Performance Car, for photographic and performance statistical material. Naturally there are also pictures from Ford — Steve Clark and Sheila Knapman providing the best service I know of from acar manufacturer. Ifthe pictures are grainy and dark, they are the author’s! I believe John Blunsden selected former Autocar editor Ray Hutton to decipher the manuscript. To Ray — and my home-based spelling editor Patricia — my sincere condolences, and sincere thanks.

JEREMY WALTON

1 The badge of distinction XR Fords from three continents During the 1980s we have become accustomed to sporty new Ford Escorts, Fiestas and Sierras bearing the suffix XR. Currently 45,000 peoplea year across Western Europe buy the Escort XR3i, nearly half of them living in Britain. Clearly, the XR formula of providing a superior specification for the more demanding and status-conscious customer is extremely popular. But where did the XR label come from? What do cars badged in this way offer today’s generally better educated and _ wealthier drivers? Acynic might suggest that the XR designation is just a convenient tag for Ford to market an extra-cost derivative of its mass-production models. One enthusiast even suggested that it was simply the successful Mazda RX series with letters transposed! Ford’s European reputation for thoroughly researched sales techniques is emphasized by their previous success with badgework of the GT, RS, Ghia, S and ‘injection’ school. To purists brought up on a diet of Ferrari GT, GTO and other thoroughbred bearers of the now widely debased Gran Turismo idea, Ford’s adoption of the GT label may have seemed like a cheap trick. But such elitist thought ignored the fact that, in the case of Ford at least, those badges meant that mechanical and trim changes removed vehicles like the Cortina and Corsair from their straightforward family/business role and offered genuine improvements to the basic vehicle for more enjoyable motoring. Thus the 1.5-litre Cortina GT of 1963 offered a Motormeasured 91.5mph, covering 0-60mph within

12.1 seconds and returning a reasonabl 26.1mpg. The ordinary Cortina of 1198ce di 74.8mph, 0-60mph in a leisurely 25.4sec ani 27.2mpg.

Since both versions of the Cortina offerec roughly the same accommodation and could b serviced with equal ease, it could be seen tha Ford had begun to offer the recipe of economica enthusiast motoring that is welcomed s warmly by XR owners today. Then the emphasi was on improved performance alone, witl suspension receiving only very cursor modifications (unless you opted for the 1,558c: Lotus-Cortina) and interiors scarcely changec apart from fitting a tachometer. The burgeonin; British tuning industry, centred on_ the enormous improvements that could be made tc the Mini or the Mini-Cooper, offered specia competition-orientated seats, steering wheel: and instrumentation. So it did not take For« long to realize the potential in this market of < sports saloon. It took a decade of increasing prosperity ir Western Europe before all the changes we tak« for granted could be offered for the first XR o the type that is so familiar today. The Escor XR3, announced

in September and available

from November 1980, offered potential owner: 17 extra horsepower with the model’s usual fue and service economy. The shock for the accessory industry lay in the long list of option: Ford themselves offered — and which so many customers

ordered, even

if they added

more

than £1,000 to the cost of the car — and standarc equipment that encompassed items such a:

The inside and outside story of the original Mercury Cougar XR7 with its large cast-iron V8 engine driving a leaf sprung

live

rear axle, an arrangement that was normal for Ford US products of 1967. Much of the mechanical hardware was shared with

the more famous Mustang, but wheelbase was longer, and the appeal aimed at customers wanting more luxury and comfort.

10

front and rear spoilers, sports-style front seats and a small steering wheel. Although this 1980 high-performance Escort is the vehicle that 99 out of 100 Britons and most Continentals would identify as ‘the first XR’ it is a fact that Ford themselves had sold nearly a million XR-badged

cars

wheelbase 3 inches longer than the legendary Ford ‘pony car’. The XR-7 (I have never discovered what happened to XR-1!) was sold with a choice of V8 engines, whereas the Mustang was originally available with basic in-line six-cylinder units. That first XR-7 was possibly the most powerful XR to be offered in terms ofgross output figures. It came with 200bhp (SAE) from 4.7 litres (289cu in) of ex-Mustang iron V8 or — in the trim that C & Dassessed — there was a 6.4-litre (390cu in) V8 of 320bhp (SAE) at 4,800rpm and a massive 427lb/ft torque at 3,200rpm. For 323.85 dollars extra, the XR-7 offered disc front brakes (11.4in diameter Kelsey Hayes vented units — rear drums were 10 X 1.75in) and ‘heavy duty’ springs and dampers, plus an anti-roll bar at the front end. Included in this ‘GT Performance Group’ of options was a faster-reacting ratio for the recirculating-ball steering, which was powerassisted as a 95 dollar option. The Mercury Cougar XR-7 C & D tested cost 4,708 dollars (well under £3,000 at the prevalent exchange rate) laden with options such as limited-slip differential and air conditioning. It was a magnificent straight-line performer.

before the first XR3

graced a single European showroom. I blundered into Ford’s initial use of the XR badge in America by accident, for in July 1967 Car and Driver tested a Cougar XR-7 versus a Jaguar 420 — under the slick cliche ‘Battle of the Big Cats’. Naturally there was no Ford badge on Lincoln Mercury Division’s Cougar. Later the realization dawned that this was the first widespread use of the XR badge, even ifit was on a Ford-owned Lincoln Mercury product, rather than a car bearing the blue and white oval. The Mercury Cougar XR-7 was anew product in 1967 and I am indebted to The Encyclopedia of the American Car 1930-80 (published by Publications International Ltd and compiled by Richard M. Langworth) for detailed statistics of the Cougar’s production progress. In its launch year the XR-7 was produced ina hardtop coupe style that was loosely based on Mustang’s long nose-short boot proportions, albeit built upona

highwa Sti prowling the 55mph h highways. Cougar XR7 isIS still 'ViSI ‘ord’ Mercury Division | of Ford’s s on and the 1985 version

was available. For 1985 the restyled grille Le le Hah haste aerodynamic bodywork, based on that of Ford Thunderbird, had to shift a 3,100lb 2 ged 2.3-litre harged turboc The ancestry. Ford Pinto of r four-cylinde trim) [SSI emission j | (California 145bhp

Examiner in the process. No maximum canis a the oy of 1801b/ft torque, managing 21.9 US mpg for the San Francisco seconds. speed was given for the 0.35 Cd bodywork, but 0-60mph took around 10

aa

done, concentrating on the aerodynamic front. At that stage the Golf had been in production at Wolfsburg since 1976 with Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection and 110bhp from its 1.6 litres. The Escort XR3 sold well in two primary specifications. In UK terms these were the original four-speed model from November 1980 to the spring of 1982, and the fuel injected XR3i. Specifications change fast through the Escort XR’s history; the original five-speed model hada brief life span — from spring to October 1982. Then came the XR3i with 105bhp — and the fivespeed gearbox. Outside the reference of this book, and reckoned to go to a more determined and

Car and Driver put the Cougar XR-7 through their normal fifth-wheel performance testing routine and returned stunning times that marked pre-emission control American muscle cars: 0-60mph occupied 6.5sec and 0-100mph was less than 17sec — right in the supercar league of the 1960s. The estimated top speed was 123mph, the sort offigure we would expect today from a 1.8-litre Vauxhall Astra GTE, ora turbocharged 1.6-litre Ford Escort. The Cougar XR-7’s measured maximum of 116mph at 5,000 rpm was very much the same as for a 105bhp Escort XR3i, which tells you a little about the emphasis on cubic inches and short axle ratios for the 1960s drag strip-orientated pony cars. The XR-7 followed most of the trends in the USA in the 1960s and 1970s, which means it was emasculated first by increasing emission controls and then by a public and governmental demand for improved fuel economy. You could see the engine options and the weight change with prevailing regulations and fashion. The final Cougar was barely recognizable as the same product. However, it always featured a basic front engine and leaf-sprung live rear axle layout, whatever the bodywork. In its first year of sales the XR-7 option added 27,221 to the Cougar production total, increasing to 32,712 in 1968. For the 1969 season Lincoln Mercury decided to offer a soft-top convertible and this produced 12,812 sales between 1969 and its 1973 demise. The bulk of Cougar output in XR-7 luxury guise — when it weighed up to 4,250lb compared with just over 3,000|b at its launch — came between 1974 and

affluent buyer, was

after

the

announcement

of

also

for luxury and performance versions of Ford Escort had tended to come from Germany up to ~ that point, as had all the later Granadas and Capris, the latter following a 1976 changeover. Ford Special Vehicle Engineering (SVE — initials that are synonymous with performance Fords in Europe) carried out a thorough suspension development and modification programme to take XR3 into XR3i. Much of this work was concentrated on refining spring and spring rates to achieve’ better ride characteristics. Then, not long after SVE’s 90day supervision of the production XR3i had elapsed, the Ford Motor Company introduced basic changes to the Escort bodyshell that provided new suspension mounting points, front and rear. These were adapted for all Escort and Orion derivatives from May 1983 onwards in the three plants that produce most of

Total production, as at the end of 1980, a few European

which

made in Britain. This was an historic moment,

1980, when 754,473 were made. The best individual model sales year was 1978, when 166,508 went out of Ford’s Dearborn factory.

months

the RS1600i,

made its debut at the British Motor Show in October 1982. Continentals had in fact been able to buy the vehicle in left-hand-drive form from the summer of 1982. We discuss the differences between RS1600i and XR3i in the Escort XR chapter. Initially the XR3i was sourced from Ford’s West German plant, Saarlouis, for both LHD and RHD. Then, from January 1983, the car was

the

Escort and its XR derivative, was

957,029; the Cougar XR derivative was still listed in 1985.

The XR in Europe The XR models we discuss for the bulk of this book first caught the public’s attention with the 1980 XR3 version of the Ford Escort. This was originally seen as a direct competitor for the Volkswagen Golf GTI, the 96bhp from its carburettor engine being reckoned sufficient for the task, owing to the intense work Ford had

Europe’s Ford Escorts: Halewood, in NorthWest Britain; Saarlouis, on the West German/

Belgian border, and the latest Ford plant in Valencia, Spain, which — started Escort production in 1981. The result of these moves was that the XR3i became completely acceptable for bumpy road 12

And then there were two.

Fordgivesyoumore. XR2

Escort XR3 was the first of the European XR series, introduced in late 1980. Its smaller brother, the Fiesta XR2, was announced

a year later and both featured in this advert produced by Ford ofBritain’s advertising agency Ogilvy & Mather. Copy was emotive. ‘from the driving seat the XR2 feels as responsive as if it was wired to your nervous system: taut: beautifully balanced, almost alive...’ XR2 was the second production car developed by Ford’s Special Vehicle Engineering team.

use from its introduction in Germany in October 1982, whereas the earlier XR3 had demanded too much from uncommitted owners, even if it compensated them with awesome smooth-road cornering capability. The XR3i was a big improvement, but later models are better still. It should be recorded that SVE — recently considerably expanded in the wake oftheir success in providing the basis for over 200,000 production XRs, Escort cabriolets and Capri 2.8 injections — did not work on two vehicles profiled in this book: the original XR3 and the 1983 Sierra XR4i. Both these higher performance Fords were mainstream Ford of Europe projects, the Sierra XR under the direction of Hans Gaffke, who was made responsible for SVE at Dunton in November

SVE group at what is often colloquially called ‘Dunton’, but which is formally known as Ford Motor Company Ltd Research & Engineering, Laindon, Basildon, Essex. Originally SVE were composed mostly of former Ford Advanced Vehicle Operations (FAVO) staff, a small-scale

Ford factory on the Aveley, Essex, sites; a miniaturized echo of the main company. FAVO produced Ford Escort RS models of the rear drive ‘Mk 1’ genre from 1970 to 1974, when it was closed by the political climate in the aftermath of the fuel crisis. Inspiration and driving force behind SVE has been the former British clubmans and saloon car racer Rod Mansfield. Currently manager, SVE, Rod joined Ford in 1960 and was one ofthe first FAVO employees before taking up the challenge of managing the SVE Group on February 1, 1980, almost exactly 20 years after joining the company. Amongst the team at SVE whose work is constantly in the XR limelight are the current programme supervisors Mike Smith, Harry Worrall (both previously with FAVO) and Ray Diggins. Instead ofthe original 1980 staff total of ‘around a dozen’ there are now slightly over 40 souls beavering away on performance Ford projects at Dunton. Many of them have previous career experience of Ford in competitions, such

1984.

Neither the SVE personnel, nor myself, would want readers to think that an SVE project is born without a considerable input from other parent company divisions. For example, there are 84 engine test cells at Ford R & D in Britain, and using facilities such as these — plus those of outside specialists — is a logical part of any high performance Ford development schedule. I shall refer to SVE frequently, but such cars would not be possible in splendid isolation. . . Most XR derivatives were engineered by the 13

liaison services. When I researched this book, Harry Worrall’s team had finished the 1984 Fiesta XR2 and it was in full production, following a couple offalse starts, at the Spanish Valencia plant. Ray Diggins and his group were working through the Sierra XR4x4 ready for a spring 1985 debut, and Mike Smith’s team were awaiting the results of final engine trials on the Escort Turbo RS. In this book we will discuss the following XR derivatives in detail:

as the loaned staff from Ford’s legendary rally and race preparation centre, based at Boreham Airfield, some 20 miles north of the SVE site. Aside from the three Special Vehicle Programs (yes, that’s Ford’s spelling!) teams under Messrs Smith, Worrall and Diggins, Bill Cook who has recently retired, supervised the activities of three support groups who supply chassis, engine and transmission, homologation/body and electrical, and German Model

Engine

Transmission

UK sales life

Escort XR3

1.6 CVH/96bhp

4-spd, front drive

Nov ’80 — Oct ’82

(later 5-spd)

Escort XR3i Fiesta XR2 Fiesta XR2

Sierra XR4i Sierra XR4x4

1.6 1.6 1.6 2.8 2.8

CVH/105bhp Kent/84bhp CVH/96bhp V6/150bhp V6/150bhp

5-spd, front drive 4-spd, front drive 5-spd, front drive 5-spd, rear drive

5-spd, 4-wheel drive

Oct Dec May May May

’82 onward ’81 — Sept ’83 ’84 onward ’83 onward ’85 on

The sales life dates are biased toward the earliest likely date of UK registrations, rather than general sale date. As an example, you would be extremely unlikely to find a new CVH (Compound Valve angle Hemispherical head) engined XR2 registered in May 1984. Yet that is when the first Ford press vehicles were ready for assessment, and it is just possible that some escaped for public sale before the block on deliveries was imposed for some months of summer 1984, a story that is recounted in the relevant chapter.

The XR in Africa

according to Motor correspondent and exstaffer Jeremy Sinek, Ford SA claimed only 140mph and 0.60mph in ‘less than 8 seconds’. I am indebted to legendary Ford Boreham rally engineer Mick Jones, now _ Ford competitions manager in South Africa, for some further information on the South African XRs. He tells me that the XR6 badge stayed in production and probably accounts for ‘10,000

In South Africa XR6 and XR8 are already spoken for. Both designations went on cars for their version of Group 1 racing, for which 200 production examples have to be manufactured before a manufacturer can compete. Ford havea factory at Port Elizabeth and they entered the XR game with a 3-litre V6-powered Cortina (the engine most familiar in earliest Capris or Granadas in Britain, but also found in the Ford Transit van during the 1980s). The South African Ford Cortina XR6 offered 140bhp for the public and over 200bhp for racing with triple Weber downdraught carburation. By mid-1983 Ford South Africa perceived that the XR6 was no longer sufficient to cope with rivals from Alfa Romeo and BMW, so the American Ford Mustang 5-litre ‘Cleveland’ V8 was adopted to punch along a special five-speed Sierra XR8. Some 250 were built and sold at the equivalent of £15,700 in the summer of 1984. For the road, they had 205bhp on tap. Performance claims were very conservative:

or more’ cars, but not all were Cortinas, for Ford

SA took the basic V6 transplant idea and also applied it to the Sierra as XR6. By the winter of 1984-85 the XR8 had proved a formidable saloon car competitor, its basic specification providing four-piston calipers for front and rear disc brakes, a five-speed BorgWarner gearbox, limited-slip differential and four-barrel (choke) Holley carburettor flowing 70cu ft per minute. Coupled to the 5-litre V8 this made a popular road car — another 250 were anticipated to follow the original cars of 1984. The racer pumped out 325bhp, and was timed at 152mph during the Kyalami 3 Hours in 1984. 14

Adding an ‘i’ to the badgework on the tail of the Escort XR3 in

autumn 1982 made a world of difference;

the

engine added

the

car’s

fuel-injected

only 9bhp but

performance

was

considerably improved and revised gearing — using fivespeed

gearbox

—

made

for

quieter high speed running. Suspension modifications improved comfort and road manners.

The Ford Sierra XR4i arrived

in the UK during spring 1983 and

was

not

acclaimed. Most criticism seems

universally

customer to have

centred on the extrovert looks, which made heavy use of red

strip inserts,

inside and out, plus the ‘biplane’ rear wing and

non-body

colour

Some

of _ the

cladding.

specialists

made a _ fortune colour-coding cladding to steel paintwork; Ford did the job themselves when the XR4x4

was

announced

approximately two years later.

erations (FAVO) in Britain. Either way these special Cortinas were based on the UK’s

Essex 3-litre V6 and associated four-speed gearbo x.

16

The current XR6 is based on the Sierra and has proved a remarkably popular production choice. It retained the 3-litre V6 last used in Britain by Capri 3.0, but mated with a close-ratio five-speed gearbox. Top speed was about 124mph with 0-60mph claimed as 9.4 seconds. Note the single rear wing, five-door body and XR3i-style hubcaps.

Although it wore the double decker XR4i rear wing, the V8-powered Sierra XR8 from Ford South Africa was based on the five-

door body, with the original cheaper Sierra slatted grille, and RS seven-spoke alloy wheels. The 15in wheels were a little undertyred on 195/60 VRs, for the 5-litre Ford Mustang V8 engines kicked out 200bhp at 4,000rpm and 2431b/ft of torque around 3,400rpm. Other standard features included a five-speed American gearbox and four-wheel disc brakes. Ford claimed, conservatively, 140mph and 0-62mph in under 8.0 seconds.

The second version of the XR2 was a much more refined car, and quite a lot quicker than before, thanks to the ex-Escort XR3 power unit. The later Fiesta XR took time to filter on to the 1984 UK market, but over 4,000 were sold in the closing months of that year. These multi-hole alloy wheels, standard on the first XR2, were an option on the later car, as is the lift-out glass

sunroof panel.

18

The XR customer Why do Ford put different badges on cars that seem to be aimed at the same equipment and performance-conscious sectors of the market? I put the question to William Camplisson, marketing director at Ford’s Warley HQ. ‘There is the fact that selling over 25,000 XR Escorts last year (1983) made them a common car. You see them everywhere. The RS customer wants to

be different, wants to spend more; he wants to leave the crowd behind.’ What about the alternative ‘injection’ label, as used for Capri/Granada 2.8-litre V6s in performance trim? Had that any further life left in it? Mr Camplisson felt that the ‘injection’ badge was unlikely to be used again, spelt out in opm

ZENON

NEON

full, as ‘pretty well all such cars will be injected anyway by the time a Capri successor comes along. However, we still think that little letter “i” is potent and that is why it is still used on XR3i/ XR4i’. Informal talks with members of the marketing staff further down the executive ladder produced some fascinating market research results for the typical Escort XR3 owner. I was told: ‘There is no surprise in the fact that the average XR owner is considerably younger than many other new car buyers, and younger than the typical Escort purchaser. In Germany the average is 29 years old; Britain follows form with the typical XR owner averaging out at 33.’ ‘What did surprise us was that the typical

NE

WS

SIERRA KRAG

&

&

\Bsswoo A

ee

loc of the five doors l the usefulness 1 XR4i. ] Besides igi ) - the XR4x4 could not have been a greater contrast to the original restrained interior with red striping more much a featured 4x4 ed alloy-wheel RS the neELariie: Pa ristieated system was just

as for the XR4i, but anew exhaust largely banished and simplified instrumentation. The 150bhp V6 w as exactly t The cars were | drive system. ituti s made to accommo date the four-wheelificati ns and substitution modificatio of the many three-door version sold in LHD markets. Lares in Perna 1985 for early summer sales in the UK; a counterpart

XR4i stopped in its orginal form in most European markets early in 1985 but started a new life in North America as the Merkur

XR4Ti, a new marque sold through Lincoln-Mercury dealers. It is assembled in Germany around key Ford US components on

the mechancial side — 2.3-litre 170bhp turbocharged four-cylinder engine. Road & Track reported quicker acceleration times spring than the European 150bhp V6 XR4i. Launch price was equivalent to £15,280 at the depressed pound-to-dollar rate of 1985!

rather than the imaginary typical sports/racy saloon customer. We intended the car to appeal to family owners, with just the same accommodation and service economy as our mainline cars, but with that extra sporty pace and some tasty extra equipment. There are plenty of people who own XRs for reasons other than pure performance, and that is one reason why we can continue to offer XR and RS derivatives to a market that some of our rivals see as simply composed of one customer type.’

Escort XR user — in other words the person who drives it most, rather than the owner, which could easily be an anonymous company purchaser — was revealed in 90% of cases as being male.’ Recalling the number of women seen at the wheel of Escort XRs in the south of England, this came as quite a shock, but Ford market research has a habit of getting such facts right. Other random XR observations included the facts that XR2 owners averaged 34 years of age in the UK and that the equivalent figure for the Sierra XR4i owner is ‘40 plus. . ’ — a pause for thought — ‘plus quite alot. . . say, 50 for many of the company-owned ones’. My informant continued: ‘You should also note that the tendency is for XR owners to be married, not the sports car-bachelor type at all. In fact we found that 80% of XR3i customers are married and 70% of them had kids.’ ‘This shows that we met our original target,

Another Ford marketing man, reluctant to get

into any more trouble with his wife’s keen perusal of the motoring press for his outspoken

comments on cars and sex, simply summed up XR-versus-RS as: ‘The relationship is exactly as for soft and hard porn! One is just a little further up the totem pole than the other. . ” Given that you are interested in Ford XR of the European kind, there are the three main model choices to make: Fiesta, Escort or Sierra.

20

In the chapters that follow I try to set out these primary choices, along with the production changes that could affect a buyer’s decision on the new or secondhand market. We — by which I mean the author plus considerable technical ONO

support in pictures and performance statistics from the AGB magazine Performance Car — also explore some of the personal touches you can make

to an XR, and assess their overall

benefits and disadvantages in daily use.

aaa

PAL

22

2 Escort XR3 Performance in a front-drive package To understand the Escort XR, you first need a little Jate 1970s background of how Ford transformed the Escort from two generations of rear-drive models into the current front-drive car that has been such a worldwide sales success

company’s

efforts

from

drawing-board

to

showroom sales and service, and it is exactly the

kind of organization that governments and trade unions loath because of its immense power in determining employment and economic success and failure. The big multinational corporations such as Ford and GM

- a process aided by the attractive image of the XR3 in Europe, South Africa and Brazil. The American Escort, a best-seller in its own right, has little that is mechanically or bodily interchangeable with its European counterpart. Yet its front-drive layout follows the same transverse engine/in-line transaxle principles, and the wheelbase is practically the same. However, the American market is not serviced with Escort XR performance models; in the USA a GT in carburated or fuel injection form was offered within a spoiler-equipped body. Alternatively, buyers are offered Escort underpinnings beneath the Mercury LN7 or Ford EXP coupe two-seater, and these slower-

wield,

literally,

the economic

strength

of a

prosperous nation and can boost acountry such as Spain from car manufacturing desert to million-plus output within a decade. The Escort is the perfect example of a multinational car and Ford claim the largest annual sales per annum of any one-brand model, beating the Toyota Corolla and VW Golf for that title in 1982 and 1983. The engineering behind the Escort, and therefore

its

XR

cousins,

was

similarly

international. For example, the responsibility for styling exteriors in Europe rests at Merkenich. However, the West German head of styling (also with final responsibility for aerodynamics, so important in the 1980s), is Uwe Bahnsen, who has lived in Britain for many years. Uwe co-ordinates the efforts of the Essexbased interior styling staff and men of Merkenich from spacious and appropriately stylish offices at the Essex R & D centre. As for

selling derivatives are offered with carburettor,

injection or turbocharged 1.6-litre engines. Back to XR background and the 1970s. Ford Research and Development in Europe is centred on a West German site (Merkenich) and in Laindon, Essex. Literally thousands of engineers work in both countries, frequently assisted by computer links between European Jocations and their Dearborn, Michigan parent. Ford was the first car company to appreciate the worth of the European market as a whole, and its multi-national engineering effort reflects a policy of integration that was formalized by the formation in 1967 of Ford of Europe. This is the umbrella organization that co-ordinates the

any other senior Ford executive, some ofhis life

will be spent commuting to and from Germany, using Ford company aircraft based at Stanstead, or the range of telecommunications provided in his office, to set up one of the many meetings that are needed to progress a multi-national design. 23

Styling rendering for the original XR3 created tremendous management enthusiasm for the sporting Escort considerably upmarket oftheir original intentions. Thus the ‘High Tech’ look leaning on four-hole alloy wheels with their Porsche echoes and the further emphasis on aerodynamic aids, rather than simple spoilers. Note the lack of a passenger door mirror at this stage, even though the full air deflector package, including rear wheel spats, is in place.

facilities all over Europe as Ford then lacked their own full-size tunnel) shaped the new Escort to bring it below a target Cd of 0.40, necessary in the age of fuel-efficient performance. Underneath those more slippery Escort panels went a complete contradiction in drive layout from that of earlier Escorts. The later Escort featured a brand new CVH four-cylinder engine, mounted transversely across the engine bay with a transaxle containing four gears to divert power from the Fiesta-based components to the unequal-length drive-shafts. These were originally solid on the left-hand, shorter, side and hollow ‘to eliminate low-speed resonances’, on the almost double-length right. By contrast, the previous Escort had had the same layout mechanically as the original 1968 model: north-south, front-mounted engine, feeding an in-line four-speed gearbox, thence to a prop-shaft and the leaf-sprung live back axle.

Similarly, the final responsibility for engineering lies with Briton Ron Mellor residing at the Essex base, but much of the mechanical work, particularly on transmissions and power units, is carried out by the Merkenich team. The West German base also holds the brief for practical testing everywhere from the Arctic wastes of Finland to the deserts of North Africa and Arizona. The company’s main test track is at Lommel, in Belgium, but controlled by the German engineering headquarters.

Escort development Although the previous rear-drive generation of boxily-bodied Escorts sold well, particularly in Britain where it displaced the Cortina for a year’s reign as the UK Number 1 seller, Ford could not have changed direction more sharply when it came to producing a successor. Instead of aboxy line and an aerodynamic drag factor of 0.45, over 2,500 wind-tunnel tests (held at five 24

Ford’s British engineers work over the 1977 interpretation of how the front-drive Escort would humble beginnings 2k. Much aerodynamic fine-tuning, including the extended boot and headlamp/bonnet alignment finally brought Ford both é individual look and the sub-0.4 Cd figures desired.

From ‘6 JF

Ford Fiesta, the smallest car in the id given the company the chance to transverse engine/front drive and the Escort amounted to a scaling up of that concept. The space and weight-saving that front transverse engine can provide has been gnized since the advent of the Mini in 1959. although it should be noted that the Mini’s transmission — carried over to the Metro — is

totally different to the system used by Ford and the majority of mass-produced front-drive cars. Ford and the others use a separate transaxle/ gearbox

assembly,

mounted

in line with

the

transverse engine, whilst the Mini’s gear train is integrated with the engine and shares the same oi] supply, and it required considerable reengineering to cope with both 1980’s noise level requirements and any possibility ofoffering five 25

Although the front-drive arrangements of the Escort owed a lot to Fiesta experience, the independent rear suspension was totally new. Here one can see that Ford went about the task conscientiously with transverse arms carefully located longitudinally and coil springs working separately from telescopic, outboard, dampers. However, some errors were made. The detail of mounting points for those inner transverse arm

bolts, and for the longitudinal locating arms, has now

been

expensively changed. The result is that today’s Escorts and XRs are of much better ride quality than the originals and no longer

wear their wheels at a variety of odd camber angles.

pushrod power, an engine that traces back to the crossflow ‘Kent’ series (940 to 1,598cc) found in the previous Escort and many other earlier Fords. As the Fiesta had been available with a maximum of 53bhp and 1.1 litres at the Escort design stages (up to 1977 model year; Fiesta later grew into 1.3 and 1.6-litre options), it was obvious that some considerable strengthening of the Fiesta’s transmission components would be needed for the more powerful and heavier new Escort. Do not make the common mistake of assuming that all Escort transmissions in the new body are the same. The car started life with four forward gears only and retained this quartet of ratios until 1982 in Britain, when five

forward gears. Although the Fiesta provided a platform on which to test the new Escort components and an example to follow, the Escort came complete with a brand new overhead-camshaft engine. The CVH (as explained earlier, the letters refer to the cylinder head and valve design) was and is built at a purpose-built new Ford factory at Bridgend, in South Wales. For all Escorts save the UK-supplied 1.1-litre, the CVH provided motivation, in three levels of tune and two capacities: 1.3 litres/69bhp; 1.6 litres/single-choke carburettor and 79bhp; or the XR3 option (now sold for the Fiesta XR2), the twin-choke carburated CVH of 96bhp and 1.6 litres. The 1.1 Escort simply used ex-Fiesta

26

Throughout

the

book

mentions of XR3/3i and XR2

in its second guise are accompanied frequently by reference

to

the

CVH

(Compound Valve _ angle Hemispherical chamber) engine. The South Walesmanufactured

units

have

a

unique valve gear design that tilts the two valves (in black) per cylinder head chamber. The angle between the valves is 45 degrees, further askew at

7 degrees when viewed as a transverse section through the cylinder. The idea is to give the full power potential of a hemispherical | combustion chamber, without the cost and complexity of using two overhead camshafts to drive the valves. Hydraulic valve

lifters have also proved themselves in reliable service with low maintenance cost.

KW MAG

The September 1980 announced XR3 in its plainest guise, without the common sunroof and spotlight options. Mirrors were colour-coded to the paintwork, but the natural

matt black shades of bumper end-pieces

and aerodynamic

equipment was accompanied by the use of the matt black to emphasize side window

surrounds. sections

Steel followed

bumper the

twin

mirror layout and picked up on body paintwork shade.

By the time this spotlighted XR3 was called to Ford photographic duty along the Al2, the XR sales rate had handsomely exceeded the

predicted 10 per cent of all Escorts. Only the cheaper MG Metro could get close to XR3 on sales in the UK, and that Austin Rover model did not arrive until May 1982.

28

Size of the rear is emphasized in this open hatchback shot, along with a Ford desire to promote both sporty recreational use and hatchback versatility. No longer did the sports saloon lack family appeal...

gears were initially (and very briefly) offered as an option on the 1.6, becoming standard within months of optional availability. For the XR3 four gears were also the standard fitment until March 1982, when five gears were offered as a standard feature with the carburettor engine; the XR3i had five gears right from its October 1982 introduction from the Saarlouis factory.

Escort 1.6 and these included the gearbox, its ratios and drive-shafts. . . but the XR3 featured a 3.84 final drive, compared to the 1.6’s ratio of 3.58, in order to compensate for the XR’s use of the unique 14-inch alloy wheels and low-profile tyres, and because a premium was placed on acceleration for this sports model. Before we explore the unique features of the XR3, and how it was developed, it is worth knowing that all current front-drive Escorts share 19.55:1 ratio rack-and-pinion steering (a reasonable 3.7 turns, lock-to-lock) and that all 1980 Escorts were allowed 9-gallon/40-litre fuel tanks. The 79bhp Escort 1.6 provided the XR3’s 200mm/7.87in single-plate clutch (all Escorts have cable operation for simplicity — and occasional frailty) and the braking layout. At the front, this meant vented discs of 9.4in diameter and at the rear 180mm/7.1inx32mm/1.25in thick drums. All Escorts utilized vacuum boost braking response, but it is worth noting that the XR3i offered bigger back brakes from the new Escort van as part of a general specification

Incidentally, the arrival of the five-speed gearbox, which amounts to an overdriven top gear added to the previous four ratios, coincided with the need for extra Escort engine bay space for diesel derivatives. Five-speed cars demanded different drive-shaft lengths to those originally specified. There has never been a 1.3litre XR. but it is worth noting that 1300 Escorts were optionally available with a five-speed gearbox from March 1982 in the UK. Quite a lot of basic work on the transmission was needed before it served in the first frontdrive Escorts, including wider gears and stronger bearings within a larger transaxle housing. So far as the XR3 was concerned, it shared many fundamentals with the 79bhp 29

The 1980 ‘Mark 3’ Escort was a major change for Ford’s popular small car with front-wheel-drive and mechanical arrangement

derived from that already in use in the Fiesta. CVH overhead camshaft engine was news, however, and the most highly tuned 1.6-litre version formed the basis of XR3.

of market volume is also the reason that we have not had an Escort coupe line like that offered in, the USA. At least that is what senior company executives say, but perhaps it was simply a case of letting the profitable Capri see out its days with no European coupe alternative to blunt its appeal. Back with our Escort XR, which Uwe Bahnsen and many others at Ford see as doing both a sports coupe and sports saloon job for

improvement. This also included extra fuel tank capacity — from 40 to 48 litres — ahead of the mainstream switch to larger fuel reservoirs in 1983.

Applying the XR treatment How did Ford make the XR3 unique? ‘Initially we had thought of what turned out to be the XR3 as a simpler, cheaper, Escort S model’, explained a Ford product planner to the author in 1984. ‘There had been an increasing awareness that customers wanted something more from sporting small saloons than the rather cliche S derivatives we had offered. The market has grown up in the wake of the Golf GTI’s success and that influenced the XR3’s final specification considerably.’ Uwe Bahnsen added two other aspects to the XR story when he revealed that the 96bhp version of the CVH engine ‘could simply have been an option for the Ghia’, and that his styling teams had progressed an XR3 Escort van to the stage where the public were invited to comment on its appeal. ‘The trouble was that the market for recreational vans in Europe is simply not the size that is possible in the United States, so we

Ford,

we

find

that

the

mainstream

Ford

engineers in Germany produced much of the visible hardware that set the XR3 apart from its less sporting brethren. The XR3’s exterior was the most obvious change, skilfully blending maximum sales appeal with improved aerodynamics and ‘alloy wheel appeal’. The basic body was that of a three-door Escort — unlike the first Sierra XR4i concept, in which the three-door was uniquely styled around the hind three-quarters. It helps to know that Ford engineers set out in 1976 with a brief that encompassed the demand for a 12% improvement in aerodynamics over the ‘Brenda’-coded second-generation Escort,

which model had been slightly inferior in aerodynamics to the original Escort. This meant

had to drop the idea.’ Incidentally, that question

30

that ‘Erika’, the front-drive Escort, had to be pared down from its predecessor’s lacklustre 0.448 to 0.40Cd or below. As Ford worked through the model stage it was found that the addition of 75mm/2.9in to the boot, and some detail panel alterations — the vestigial boot-lid lip and the bonnet drooping over the headlamps — were vital to meet this areodynamic requirement. In fact, Ford have always claimed to have considerably bettered their targets, reporting a drag coefficient of 0.385 for the saloons, 0.39 for the estate and

0.375 for the XR3. There was quite a row over the Ford claims in Germany with the newspaper Der Stern conducting a series of tests on hire cars in the VW wind-tunnel at Wolfsburg before an audience that included the author. But what matters to us in this book is how Ford improved the XR3 over other Escorts. Of course, spoilers were used front and rear, but their shape, and the idea of shrouding flatter wheels to produce a better Cd figure than even

The Karmann-built Escort Cabriolet was displayed at international motor shows in 1982 with XR3 badges but became a 1.6i Cabriolet when

it arrived in Britain during August

1983. The injection model uses the same 105bhp engine as an XR3i, and parts such as the ventilated front

disc brakes are also common. However, the suspension of the open-top Escort was

specifically developed to suit its greater weight, with a softer ride than for XR3i.

the thin-wheel Escorts could offer, were a result of wide-ranging aerodynamic tests. Some car companies do not go along with the idea of improving the quickest model’s aerodynamics — for example the Audi 200 turbo is rated at 0.32 compared with the widely publicized 100’s 0.30 — but GM Vauxhall-Opel recently echoed the Ford approach with the Kadett GSi/Astra GTE offering the best Cd in the range. Thus, the XR3 took the Escort’s basic threedoor outline and added a large deformable plastic back spoiler, shrouds ahead of the rear wheels in hard plastic and the same material for the spoiler’s front extension and wheel shrouds. The rear wheel shrouds are absent in some development video and still photography from Ford, and I suspect this may be one reason why the original 0.385 claim for XR was reduced to the final 0.375 during the last 12 months of development. However, the slightest deviation on the standard twin-mirror layout would also have been reason enough to alter the claim.

ROS

Badged as XRYV, Ford stylists in Britain and Germany developed a sports van with all the XR trimmings. Back section was luxuriously laid out and the project aimed at the van set which has become so significant in the USA. European market conditions, and the lack of likely customers, stifled this new development of the XR theme.

performance machinery of the Porsche and Lotus kind. In 1980 the Golf GTI was still produced in standard form with the 175/70 HR radials that it wore in 1976 on alloy or steel 13x5.5in wheels. Ford specified 185/60 HR radials from Dunlop (D3), Goodyear (NCT) and

The special alloy wheels were part of the XR3’s basic appeal from the beginning, and only with the XR3i did a styled steel wheel option become available. The four-oval design has strong Porsche 928 echoes and is an attractively individual design that has the key bonus for Ford enthusiast owners over all previous designs of sports alloy wheels — the XR3 ones are much easier to clean! The

14in

diameter

rims

were

Pirelli (P6). Of these choices I found the Dunlops squealed and wore readily, but were less prone to aquaplaning than the Pirelli P6s, particularly when the Italian company’s covers were more than half worn. In 50,000 miles of XR3 motoring I have not encountered a better

5.5in wide,

about the same as had been traditional on performance Escorts since the 1968 Twin Cam. However the introduction of increasingly lowprofile radial tyres — covers that offered increasing width compared with their depth from central beading — meant a new, higher standard of grip could be offered. Low-profile tyres had been developed in formula car racing through the late 1960s and 1970s passion for

all-rounder than the Goodyear NCT, its grip and squeal-free progress only balanced in the minus column by undoubted harshness in a car that is hardly renowned for luxurious quietness! Naturally, the XR3 wore completely different suspension settings compared with the slower Escort variants, but the principles of MacPherson strut front and independent rear end via transverse arms with longitudinal links were retained. Suspension changes for XR3

ever-wider wheels and tyres, but Ford were one

of the first mass producers to fit this kind of rubber

to

anything

other

than

_high52

included the use of a 22mm/0.87in front antiroll bar and the replacement of twin-tube damper units by monotube Bilstein gas-filled shock absorbers. The shock absorber switch was a hurried move and changes, particularly in rear telescopic bump and rebound settings, were introduced after the car went on sale, just as there had been for the regular Escorts on the British market. The XR3 had much stiffer springing and that of the rear was of the progressive-rate kind. It offered a stiffish 128]b/in wheel rate initially and progressed to a racing-level 220lb/in to jar the XR3 engine with Janspeed turbo conversion. The turbocharger is a_ small Rotomaster unit snuggled neatly

below

the

exhaust

manifold though with a long

inlet tract to the carburettor. System is of the blow-through type, using Weber-pattern carburettor on a standard cast manifold.

incorporate

This

kit does

a

not

charge-air

intercooler; 40 per cent increases in both power and

torque are claimed though fuel consumption is inevitably higher.

Low rider! A Ford RS suspension kit provided the XR3 with closer view of the tarmac and was one of the favoured methods of improving the ride and handling of the original cars.

teeth on full load. In perspective this meant the XR3 had the same initial spring rate as an estate, but went on to nearly double the stiffness of any other Escort — and most sports saloons — on the market. The result was magical smooth-circuit capability, even with the splayed angles of the original W-plated (UK) Escort, but a jarring Broad ride. At the front, bearing about 60% of the XR3’s total 925kg/2,040lb kerb weight (Autocar), the car was originally specified on spring rates that were the same as those of 1.3/1.6 saloons, corresponding to just under 100lb/in.

least the first six to 12 months of ownership, but if they then get a chance to drive the XR3i or any post-May 1983 Escort with the mainstreammodified suspension, they will become disenchanted with the ‘pogo stick’ suspension of the early models.

The overall result was not satisfactory to many UK owners and Ford changed every aspect of the suspension they could in the XR3i and subsequent models. The fault lay in the bumpy and often harsh ride over badly surfaced roads, with the kind of restless jogging motion emanating from the rear end that had also been criticized on less sporting models. But if you are 22 years of age and enjoy your XR3 driving, you will probably wonder what all those old men were

talking

about,

for the

sports

XR3 engine and performance With an almost ‘square’ bore and _ stroke relationship of 79.96mmx79.52mm (1,596cc) the XR3 engine shares its basic dimensions with those ofthe single-choke/79bhp Escort 1.6. The cast-iron block and alloy cylinder head are also the same. A sturdy five-bearing iron crankshaft

car-like

response on smooth roads is fabulous fun. I am willing to bet that the keenest XR owners will carry On enjoying the original suspension for at

Car ofthe year ’8L. Carofthe moment, Autumn 82. 1981 the f the

than 55.4 mpg at

Year'S1 Autumn

Ford Escort v Y }

o

capacity.

C

With

simy t rin its class. Efficient

a choic

3.de 5-daor badies. Sit down in the back

oduced a car 80 competitor has come

\d

discover what a lot of room or your legs, More than

many cars that are much bigger

ce ve the Hale

steadily better and better, ever

actory. t

it was launched in October 1980.

since performance the

.

Engines and transmissions

For example, Ford fa

joe

an

)XR3's will

And F

L6 litre engine a (optional on the 1.3) { omy and quiet motor Body styles and capacities

Efficient eng

ga’

s, Wher hability that re:

scort.

The most efficient car

Ford gives you more.

The five-speed gearbox appeared briefly on the UK market with the 96 horsepower carburated engine. By the time this advertisement appeared, the XR3i_ five-speed was just weeks away, although it would be January 1983 before British production of an XR3 began.

Neat

five-speed

gearbox

offered from 1982 was simply the four-speeder of the first front-drive Escorts with an

overdrive top gear added. It is capable of transmitting 140bhp without problems. Change quality is generally good.

is provided and it was allowed a sustained maximum of 6,300rpm. The hemispherical combustion chamber shape echoed some of the great twin-cam performance engines of the past and contained comparatively large inlet and exhaust valves: 42mm inlet and 37mm exhaust. Why did the XR3 develop 96bhp at 6,000rpm, well ahead of the standard 1.6’s 79bhp at 5,800rpm? An exclusive XR camshaft profile was part of the answer, providing a 208 degrees duration of exhaust valve opening period anda deeper breathing 208 degrees for the intake valve, these figures comparing with 195 degrees duration for the rest of the Escort range. Although this altered exhaust and _ inlet camshaft timing, the XR3 retained both the usual valve diameters and the use of hydraulic lifters that had been tested successfully at 7,000rpm for less powerful Escorts. The XR3 also retained the regular CVH models’ 9.5:1 compression ratio, but had its own Weber twin-choke carburettor in place of the Motorcraft-branded single-choke unit that feeds the 79bhp Escort 1.6. Externally the XR3 also drew a slight power boost from a fourbranch exhaust manifold and higher-efficiency exhaust system. Not only was overall power

boosted 17bhp, but the XR3 also offered a useful 13.5mkp/97lb/ft of torque, rather than the standard 1.6 model’s 12.7mkp/91.8lb/ft. This compensated for weight increase compared with less well equipped 1.6L saloons, albeit with the penalty of needing 4,000rpm to extract maximum pulling power, rather than the normal 1.6’s torque peak at 3,000 revs. On the road the average result of these XR3 changes was to provide a top speed in the 110 to 113mph region with a 0-60mph time in the 9sec. bracket: precise figures are provided in the appendices. Fuel consumption? You could get down to 25-26mpg by driving the original fourspeeders flat out, but 27-30mpg was the pleasant surprise for most owners. The official Government mpg figures for 1980 were: urban cycle, 27.7mpg; at steady 56mph, 40.9mpg; at constant 75mph, 31.7mpg. February 26, 1982 was the date on which Ford announced the availability of the five-speed transmission: ‘The first to give five forward gears on a European Ford car.’ Since the first four ratios were unchanged, as was the carburated 96bhp engine, straightline acceleration was the

same as the original. The additional 0.76 overdrive fifth allowed 22.5mph per 1,000rpm

35

Original ‘Laser Stripe’ seat trim of the XR3 is accompanied by the racy two-spoke steering wheel that was fitted for all XR3s and the early XR3i. This five-speed car displays the clear 7,000rpm tacho and 140mph speedometer with central temperature and fuel gauges.

instead of 17.89mph. In other words a 70mph cruise in top on the motorway went from the four-speed XR’s 3,900rpm buzz to the fivespeeder’s 3,100rpm amble. Naturally, fuel consumption benefited from the new gearbox as well, Ford quoting 28.5mpg urban, 47.1mpg at 56mph, and 36.7mpg at 75mph. Equally naturally, prices increased too!

spell when you could easily pay £6,000 for a plain XR3, or save at least a £1,000 by importing it yourself from the Continent (Belgium was the favourite source), Ford retaliated by providing the five-speed gearbox and cutting the retail price to the British customer to £5,750. Extras have always been an integral part of buying an XR, both for the new and the used car customer. To give an idea of original extra costs I have singled out central locking (£126.50); then

XR3 prices

- unique tilt-and-slide glass sunroof (£240.30); electric windows (£149.74); and the nonstandard stereo radio/cassette player (£115.55)

The XR3 was introduced in Britain at £5,123, excluding licence, delivery and number-plate charges. Prices wobbled during the spring 1982 introduction of the five-speed XR3, owing to Ford’s fight against the personal importation of cars directly from the Continent. Following a

as examples of how the original car could cost £632.09 or more than the list price by fitting popular options. Although the five-speed gearbox had joined 36

the standard XR3 specification in the spring of 1982, the option list remained a daunting sight for the cost-conscious buyer in the UK. Over 46 extra items were listed at that stage — some not applicable to the XR3 — thus you could shoot well beyond the £6,000 barrier with the items listed above, by then priced at £830.90, assuming you bought the most expensive In Car Entertainment

(ICE) unit, the ESRT 32PS, at

£300.51. In fact a lot of customers went well over the £1,000 mark. The original favourite colour — black — cost an extra £76.85 and metallic paint was £84.25. Then there was the temptation ofan

electric

radio

aerial

at

£41.77;

headlamp

washers at an additional £81.01; two rear seat

belts for £50.99; tinted glass at £39.78; or longrange driving lamps at £77.64. Thus, if you ordered a black XR3 with the extras we have recounted here, the additional bill would have been £1,117.93. It pays to study the specification when buying an XR ofany kind. . . As the first XR, the Escort delighted Ford accountants and pleased most ofits customers, who ordered so many that the XR3 consistently doubled the original estimate of 6% ofall Escort sales. In Britain alone they sold over 15,000 XR3s in 1981.

the large Journalist Andrew Kirk sorts out the XR3 on a Surrey test track's steering pad. High cornering loads emphasize tail spoiler. upswept gracefully the plus wheelarches, flared and rubber profile low between gaps production

A ent ti ueSo

38

3 Fiesta XR2 Federal and racing heritage The basis for an XR Fiesta was actually laid well before we had Escort XR3. It came not from cynical marketing men, but from two very different Fiesta activities. Not long after the 1976 launch of the Fiesta in Europe — accompanied by the fanfare for a new purposebuilt plant at Valencia in Spain — the company began to deliver a special Federal version ofthe smallest Ford for the American market. That USA-bound Federal Fiesta had a 1.6-litre engine derived from the old ‘Kent’ crossflow series of pushrod four-cylinders (only 66bhp_ in emission-controlled form) and was easily identifiable by its round headlamp units and extended bumpers: the American Fiesta was 147.2in long, compared to the European car’s 142.1in.

exciting — and a 160bhp 1.6 ‘Kent’-engined car took 10th place on the 1980 Monte Carlo Rally — the primary influence for the XR2 production car came from one-make racing. The Ford Motor Credit Fiesta Championship coordinator and former Ford Boreham employee Stuart McCrudden recalled for me how Boreham’s competitions manager Peter Ashcroft and resident engine expert John Griffiths were ‘determined to get rid of the old Escort 1600s in the Ford-backed racing series. They chose Fiesta instead, presumably to tie-in with the development work that was going on at that time.’ Thus, from 1980 onward, we had the spectacle of Ford-backed series for a Fiesta derivative that did not actually reach the public

The Federal Fiesta was reasonably successful: 300,000 had been sold by September 1981. Nevertheless it did not stay the course in the 1980s and was not replaced by a US version of the 1983 facelifted car. Yet the presence of a 1.6-litre version was encouraging to sporting Europeans looking for a more powerful Fiesta. The Ford Motor Company in Britain did a lot of competition development work on the model, for which they foresaw a rally future at one stage. All sorts of hybrids were made by the Ford Competition Department at Boreham, including Fiestas with Cosworth-Ford 16-valve engines and over 200bhp, and mid-engine prototypes that preceded the company’s ill-fated Escort 1700T World Rally Championship project. Although these competition Fiestas were

two close-fought seasons of racing had been completed! From 1980 to 1983 only the 1.6-litre pushrod version was raced — not in exactly the specification that became the _ original production XR2, but echoing its all-round improvements. In 1984, both the later five-speed XR2 with the overhead-camshaft CVH engine and the original version could be raced (some of which were based on converted 1100s and 1300s, and allowed to wear those models’ rectangular lamps). For 1985, the series was to cater only for the later XR2, which had proved convincingly faster in a straight line than the original car in the 1984 mixed series. In Germany they also had one-marque Fiesta XR racing, but primarily promoted as a challenge for lady racing drivers.

in volume until December 1981, by which time

39

Cross-section of the Group 2 rallying Fiesta to show the twin Weber carburettor 1600 engine and vented front disc brakes, along with radically modified suspension based

around a completely new triangulated, lower arm. The basic 1.6-litre engine and vented braking made it into XR2 production, albeit both in considerably tamer specification!

In

1978

Ford

of

Britain

mechanics were working hard to sort out the first 1600 crossflow engined Fiestas for

the 1979 Monte Carlo Rally. Complete with twin-choke

sidedraught carburettors the power output was in excess of 150bhp, over 60bhp more than would

be

public from engine.

40

offered

the

the same

XR2

basic

Motorsport

Monte service for Ari Vatanen’s Fiesta which finished tenth in the 1979 event. Team here is under the direction of Ford Germany

engineer Thomas Ammerschlager (since a pivotal part of the Audi Quattro rally programme and now at BMW).

As an adjunct to that British racing series Ford themselves built and allowed the press to try various 1.6-litre Fiesta combinations before the XR2 became a production possibility. These tied-in with an X-pack performance option kit that could be singly or package-ordered through British RS dealers. You could also see a hint of how the performance Fiesta would develop in the 1.3 Supersport limited edition car UKlaunched in January 1981, which featured the 1300/66bhp ‘Kent’-based four-cylinder engine. This Fiesta power unit was offered across Europe from the autumn of 1977 in various combinations; previously the most popular had been the 1300S. However, when SVE tackled the XR2 project they added more elements to produce the fastest standard Fiesta, one that would comfortably top 100mph and reach 60mph from rest in some 10

Ford told Andrew Kirk of Hot Car (the predecessor to Performance Car magazine) that the decal scheme had involved the input of ‘designers, a colour specialist and a special vehicle co-ordinator under the direction ofEric Archer, head of the Colour and Trim Studio. . . Principal designers were Simon Bury (ex-Royal College of Art student of automotive design) and former Bradford University Textile Faculty graduate, David Godsell.. .. And you thought it was just a set of side stripes!

XR2 mechanical ingredients Following their triumphant engineering of the ex-Granada 2.8-litre injection engine into the Capri — which previously had a_ 3-litre carburated V6 engine as the top option — SVE were the perfect choice to tackle a Fiesta with a new heart. The crossflow power unit traced some of its lineage back to the engines seen in 1960s Fords, notably the September 1967-onward Cortinas, but the crossflow was also the motivation for countless Capris and Escorts. For the Fiesta

seconds. It also looked very different, thanks to

a five-month computer-designer decal scheme featuring a progressive fade pattern of dotted side panels that was the work of Ford’s Essex Colour and Trim Studio. In November 1981 41

A

~ 4‘s *

‘i

Another antecedent to the XR2, at least in terms oftrying out an extrovert appearance and the spoilers/wing extensions ofthe 1.3-litres that debuted in January 1981 for late sporting Fiesta, was this limited edition Fiesta Supersport (Super S in LHD) of the UK market. Its standard 1300 S engine had to serve Fiesta enthusiasts until the 1.6-litre XR2 was launched in time to close the 1981 sales year.

in the XR2 than was the case for other contemporary Fiestas. This served the purpose of allowing straighter drive-shaft runs as well as the theoretical benefit in handling through a lower centre of gravity. This well-known engine gave 84bhp DIN at 5,500rpm and 911b/ft of torque at just 2,800rpm. Crankshaft, cylinder block and head were all of cast iron, but Ford allowed a spirited 6,600rpm ‘intermittent engine speed’ and 6,300 revs for continuous use, which allowed about 90mph in third before mechanical sympathy dictated a gear-change. The transmission was as simple as possible, placed in the now usual transverse line as a transaxle unit across the engine bay. The company specified a single-plate diaphragm clutch and the transaxle was based on that of the 1.6 Escort. That meant the internal gear ratios were the same — a quartet of gears also found in the XR3 — with the duplicated 1.6 Escort final-

XR2 the rugged 1,598cc (80.98x77.62mm) engine represented a combination of the fivebearing bottom end used in the front-drive Federal Fiesta allied to the deeper-breathing

1600GT camshaft and cylinder head types used on those famous 1960s and 1970s Fords of Cortina 1600/Escort Mexico ilk. The engine ancillaries were a mixture of ancient and modern, too. The Weber 32/34 DFTA carburettor came from the same stock bin as the carb for the Escort XR3 and was mounted on a new larger-bore inlet manifold. The castiron exhaust manifold was unique to the XR2 and was one of the reasons the power quoted was not quite as much as for some of the famous rear-drive Fords that used this same basic power plant. The casting offered a 4-2-1- pipe pattern, leading into an enlarged-bore, three-silencer box system. Compared with previous 1.6-litre GT/Sport/ 1600E, or Escort Mexico use of this engine, the

compression was nominally higher at 9.2:1. Valve sizes were much the same as ever at 39.6mm inlet and 341mm exhaust, but the engine itself was mounted 15mm/0.59in lower

drive, too (the XR3 carried the lower ratio, noted

in Chapter 2). The XR2 was not offered in its original form with anything other than a fourspeed gearbox as there was insufficient room for

42

The effectiveness of the final Fiesta XR2 decal scheme depended on the body colour. External recognition points included the round headlamps, 12-hole alloy wheels, twin colour-coded mirrors and Fiesta Supersport spoilers/wing extensions. Side shot beautifully depicts the

add-on nature of the vulnerable exhaust tailpiece, whilst the white car shows that the lower edge of the door

soon

highlighted

deficiencies application!

in

any decal

43

Production 1.6-litre Kent crossflow engine fitted happily into a Fiesta engine bay and provided 18bhp more than Ford had offered previously for production Fiestas in Europe. Note the brake servo with conversion shaft from LHD to RHD running across the bulkhead. In racing use it was found advisable to further brace the bulkhead mountings for this shaft to overcome

any flexing, a failing that could lead to excess brake pedal movement.

More than speed

a five-speeder until the Fiesta’s chassis’ side rails were modified for 1984 models. The 0.951 overdrive top gear provided 18.45mph per 1,000rpm, which meant that 70mph required some 3,800 revs on the standard alloy wheels. Ford predicted a 105.6mph maximum for the XR2 and 9.3sec to squeak from rest to 60mph, and those figures were a reasonable assessment of what the independent magazines returned in Britain. Fuel consumption? The government figures were: urban, 28.2mpg; at 56mph, 43.5mpg; and at a constantly illegal 75mph, 32.8mpg. The urban figure was quite a good forecast of what many owners returned; between 27 and 29mpg could be expected amongst the independent

The XR2 sold for many more reasons than straight-line speed, the cheeky handling and improved braking appealing to many owners as much as the modified interior and exterior styling. The wheels and tyres were the most attractive and obvious change, the alloy wheels being manufactured by GKN or MAPSA toa 12-holed design styled by Ray Diggins and following the pattern used for the Capri 2.8i. The tyres were normally Pirelli P6 on UK-supplied vehicles, but Uniroyal 340/60 and Goodyear NCT were also approved by SVE. In either case the standard size was a generous 185/60 HR and the standard rim width was actually a half-inch up on the heavier Escort: 6in rim on an inch smaller

testers.

44

Glamour photograph for Hot Car magazine in 1982 emphasizes effectiveness of XR2’s cosmetics and the wide stance achieved with the alloy wheels and arch extensions.

Frontal wears

contrasts — XR2 round headlamps

(originally used on

‘Federal’

1.6 Fiesta for USA) instead of

the rectangular units of the regular car behind and has indicators built into the bumper. Chin spoiler is another identification feature.

45

Rear

spoiler

is

of flexible

plastic material and mattblack like bumpers, other wise rear identification of XR2 is limited to wider-thanstandard 6in rim wheels and

distinctive badging.

CVH model, even in racing regulations), but picked up the standard Fiesta S spring rates and a rear 14mm/0.55in roll bar. Aside from lowering the engine in the car, SVE’s most radical handling work was to increase the castor angle in the front suspension and lower the tie-bar mountings on chassis brackets by 25mm/0.98in, this modification being in association with front spring platforms that were also brought earthward — but by

diameter than Escort — 13 versus 14in. Behind those fancy wheels and tyres was a suspension system that seemed more predictable and enjoyable than that of the original IRS Escorts (including the XR3). The basic Fiesta principles of MacPherson strut front and dead beam rear axle with trailing links and Panhard rod location remained. The XR2 still did without a front anti-roll bar (the original XR2 racers had one, but it was deleted for the 46

‘Climate control pack’ for XR2 included flip-up-or-take-out sunroof, opening front quarter-lights and driver’s mirror with

interior adjustment via joystick on the door.

10mm/0.39in. New damper settings to suit a lower-riding Fiesta of considerably increased performance potential — the XR2 offered another 18bhp over the 1300S-equipped previous range leaders — were fitted as well. The result was a small car of stunning cornering capability, particularly considering the costconscious path that SVE had to follow. The ride over rough roads was not restful, but it was still better than the gas-damped XR3, and the ultimate cornering, balanced against the sheer fun of driving the car around corners, was probably not equalled in the Ford range until the Escort RS Turbo arrived at considerably greater

the conversion from LHD to RHD and fussy drivers who really ‘go for it’ will probably find themselves forever trying to adjust the ‘slop’ out of the transverse shaft linkage. The answer seems to be to brace the bulkhead mounting points. . . The back brakes for XR2 were definitely of standard Fiesta parentage (178mm/7.0in), but they used larger slave cylinders and the Escort’s 8in servo with ‘modified and strengthened mounting brackets’, according to an internal company briefing. The electrics behind the adoption of 7in

round halogen headlamps and twin auxiliary driving lamps included a seven-fuse system with energy derived from 270/50Amp battery and 55Amp alternator. A small detail on this side was that the indicators were vulnerable to city bumps, being mounted close to the leading edge of the matt black front bumpers. External equipment also included front and rear spoilers with twin mirrors that were colour coded to the body. Interestingly, no aerodynamic drag factor was provided by Ford. Internally the XR2 was

cost.

The brakes were much better than before, utilizing what are normally described as 240mm/9.45in diameter vented front discs (actually

239.45)

of 20mm/0.8in

thickness,

these being of 1.6/XR3 Escort origin, including the single piston calipers. For racing, some of the competitors used a larger diameter, non-vented RS disc, but in either case the worry is not fade,

but a sloppy pedal action. This is exaggerated by 47

ID

=~ ALT

Sn

es

.

ee semen

XR2 facia is simple with 7,000

rpm tachometer matching 140 mph speedometer and with temperature and fuel gauges between,

above

a

row

of

warning lights. Digital clock is overhead at screen rail, with interior light and rear-view mirror mount.

48

Sports-style seats are relatively sober items by comparison with the XR2’s flashy exterior; somewhat colour is described as ‘shark grey environment’

NL hail

thi

he,

ii:

the XR3, a 140mph speedometer and the standard fitment of the puny Ford P21 MW/LW push-button radio. External detailing also included plastic wheelarch extenders and overriders, which boosted the overall length over that of a standard Fiesta, leaving it at 3,718mm/146.4in. The width was up, ofcourse, owing to those wheelarch extensions and now measured 62.2in instead of the standard Fiesta’s 61.7in. Overall height was down on the standard

distinguished by sports seats in ‘shark grey environment colour’, according to a contemporary brochure, which described the fabric trims as being in Storm and Crushed Velour. A two-spoke steering wheel of 15 inches diameter controlled responsive rack-andpinion steering that required just three turns to twiddle from lock to lock. Detail internal touches encompassed the green LED readout ofthe digital clock shared by

49

By October 1982 F. English Conversions Division had acquired the rights to manufacture Kentish-based Crayford Auto Developments’ Fly-badged XR2 convertible.

options; a single-coat metallic was, logically, available for about half that amount. Another very popular option was the sunroof, but it was also not the deluxe affair of the Escort. You paid £124.72 for a glass item that had no winding action, but could simply be flipped open, or totally removed. Naturally there was the usual wide choice of Ford-branded ICE. It may help secondhand buyers to know that the most expensive set-up was the MW/LW/VHE stereo radio and cassette player coded ESRT 32PS; at introduction time this little ‘electronic multi-feature’ combination was priced at £300.51. An electric radio aerial added £41.77 and you should note that rear belts

car for the suspension reasons mentioned; XR2, a dumpy 54in instead of the usual 55.7in. Weight? SVE rated the XR2 at 800kg/1,764lb compared to the mainstream company’s quote of around 745kg/1,639lb for the 1.3-litre Fiestas.

XR2 prices The XR2 came to market in December 1981 at £5,500, some £745.52 less than the Escort XR3 of the period. As for the Escort, Ford offered a

page and more of catalogued optional goodies for the Fiesta, and many of these were useful to XR2 owners. However, the range was deliberately restricted in some respects, so you could not buy electrically-operated windows or central locking. The popular option was £76.85 spent on black paint, but you could also have a metallic finish for up to £84.25 if you chose the two-coat

were extras at almost exactly £51, too.

I must say that I never owned an XR2, but that is my loss for I believe from extensive tests that this, the cheapest XR derivative ever offered, was also the most satisfying to drive hard. 50

HORE

October 1981 and the original Ford Special Vehicle Engineering (SVE) group outside their Essex offices for the benefit of Motor’s Maurice Rowe. The picture shows, left to right: Gavin Dixon, Gordon Prout, Ray Diggins, Geoff Fox, Mike Smith, John Mitchell, Irene Bourne, Harry Worrall, Rod Mansfield, John Hitchins and ‘Tina’. SVE was to expand rapidly and needed more accommodation as the XR and other programmes gained pace.

DL

52

4 Escort XR3i A little ‘’ can mean so much . ‘I can't recall anything other than a good reception for one of our cars’, reported SVE manager Rod Mansfield in connection with Ford senior managerial appraisal sessions for the performance variants engineered in Essex. ‘The XR3i was no exception.’ This was not complacent departmental pride being expressed, but an opinion that was given hearty emphasis by the buying public, who continue to buy the second, fuel-injected, version of the XR3 in numbers that surprise even Ford. The Escort XR3i was launched on the British

.

that this Escort encapsulated crisp looks with competitive performance and_ exceptional economy, all at a price in the middle rank ofthe increasingly sophisticated opposition. Ford recognized that machinery such as Fiat Abarth’s 2-litre/130bhp Strada 130TC, and Vauxhall’s Astra GTE with its 0.30 Cd, needed High Tech performance replies. Ford chose to meet both their motorsport Group A and top-bracket performance aspirations through the Escort RS Turbo. This model did not reach any semblance of series production until the close of 1984, by which time SVE was a very much bigger department than the establishment that had so effectively graduated XR3i from the rather rough character that was XR3...

market in October 1982 and over 50,000 had

been made by January 1, 1985, the model regularly accounting for a quite hefty slab of total Ford Escort sales. When J interviewed Ford sales director William Camplisson in the autumn of 1984 he confirmed that 1982 had seen

Engineering the XR3i Development ofthe fuel-injected XR3 began in October 1981 and it was almost exactly a year later — October 4, 1982 to be precise — that the West German Saarlouis plant started to manufacture both left-hand and right-handdrive versions of the XR3i. British manufacture of the faster Escort at Halewood was originally scheduled for the five-speed XR3, but actually commenced in January 1983 for the XR3i. Some months later I took delivery of a low mileage example of one of the early cars, before the mainstream suspension modifications mentioned in the first chapter had been incorporated in May 1983, and although the effect of these changes on the XR3i was really to sanitize the improvements already made by SVE, for some reason my car never quite

15,574 Escort XRs sold, mainly in XR3 guise.

That meant 9.33% of all Escort sales in the UK were of the XR variant. Moving to 1983, William Camplisson explained that Ford in Britain had sold an incredible 27,603 performance Escorts to the UK public during one year. These consisted of 25,058 XR3i models (14.39%) and over 2,500 of

the RS1600i that was originally intended simply to fulfil a motorsport requirement for Group A homologation. During 1984 the non-Ford opposition to the Escort’s. commercial success in __highperformance form not only multiplied rapidly but frequently out-performed the Ford in specific areas. That the public kept on buying the XR3i in high numbers was due to the fact 53

A new boot-lid badge was the only

Official

external

recognition point adopted by Ford to distinguish the fuel injection XR3i from its

carburettor-engined

XR3

predecessor.

Widely used and well-proven in the German

Bosch

car industry,

K-Jetronic

fuel

injection added 9 horsepower

to the Escort’s CVH XR3 engine, becoming a far more civilized unit in the process.

Initial cost was slightly higher, but the improved fuel consumption was a long-term compensation.

One of the original half-dozen press demonstrator XR3i Escorts during a damp session during the 1982-83 winter. Locking petrol cap was now standard, but the round driving lamps cost extra, as did alloy wheels for XR3i.

matched the performance of later cars in this area. It proved a lot better than my original 25,000 miles-old XR3, but it was definitely not such an enjoyable all-rounder as the later XR3i loaned by Ford for a long weekend comparison in autumn 1984. My 24,000 mile XR3i was quicker than the company demonstrator, but the steering and ride of the later car was noticeably improved. Back to the original SVE development of the XR3i and we introduce a cast of workers, beginning with the man who outlined the main features for the XR3i: product planner Wolfgang Beese. As the Golf GTI had so clearly established the effectiveness and commercial sense of fuel injection for smaller cars that offered a competitive performance/fuel consumption balance, there was no doubt this was to be at the heart of the second-generation XR Escort. However, the company placed improvement of the suspension for everyday comfort as second only to fuel injection on their

Escort van, and they were allowed to incorporate the 48-litre/10.6-gallon fuel tank that appeared in later Escorts without performance pretensions. To implement an all-round series of changes to the XR3, Rod Mansfield called mainly on the men he had worked with on the previous SVE projects (then the Capri 2.8i and the Fiesta XR2), many of them also former FAVO employees. Overall responsibility was taken by Harry Worrall. One of the most experienced of the SVE breed, Harry’s memory encompasses work on such rarities as Ford’s first European car with fuel injection (the 1970 Capri RS2600). On this occasion the 12-month XR3i development programme would require the production of 10 prototypes to assess the modifications made. The Ford R&D centre in Essex has the resources of 85 engine test cells, most of them required day and night to meet the needs of the mainstream company engineers and the world’s varying legislation on exhaust emissions, plus the need for extreme durability tests for the equally varied mechanical sympathies of the typical Ford customer. The XR3i featured proven K-Jetronic

priorities list, and also decided to improve the interior.

By

skilled

juggling

with

forward

production dates SVE also managed to enhance the braking, using bigger back drums from the

55

The steel wheel option was disliked by key senior Ford management in the UK and took a long time to establish itselfas a geniune cost-cutter that actually offered another half-inch rim width as a bonus.

this was written, undertook the development of a new steel wheel and nylon-filled hubcaps for XR3i. ‘Big Deal’, you may cry, but these often

injection from Robert Bosch of Stuttgart. The K stands for kontinuierlich, or continuous, and refers to the constant supply of fuel to the injectors in this famous system. Both the Golf GTI and the Escort RS1600i utilize this same Bosch equipment, but SVE’s Gavin Dixon still had his share of hard work in taking charge of the engine work for the XR3i. At the time Ford were rated as a very small volume customer in fuel injection terms — just the Capri and Granada 2.81 models were using Bosch equipment in the 1981 European Ford line — and co-operation was not as good as it was by the time they came to tackle the Escort RS Turbo a couple of years later. Gordon Prout was placed in charge of cooling and ancillary engine systems, whilst John Mitchell ensured that the car could live with the increased electrical demands of fuel injection — and that it was prepared for the legal Type Approval (homologation) procedures that require so much paperwork. In charge of the XR3i prototypes and their test mileage, much of it at the company’s Belgian Lommel track, was Mick Kelly. Ray Diggins, the supervisor for the fourwheel-drive XR4x4 Sierra programme when

scorned (in the UK) steel wheels offered a larger

rim width — 6in versus the normal alloy 5.5in — and the chance for Ford to offer the car at a slightly lower cost in most markets. In Britain the steel wheels, which ran the same 14in diameter and the usual 185/60 HR low-profile tyres, represented a £125 saving over the alloys in 1982. The improved braking, utilizing the 8in diameter drum brakes from the Escort van, also included the installation of new hubs and wheel cylinders and was supervised by Tony Batchelor. An SVE employee, Geoff Fox, was designated to look after body and interior style changes, but this was more in the nature of a liaison assignment with the main company styling department, who produced a fabric trim (coded ‘Monza’) that replaced the original ‘Laser’ fabric. Not all XR3i Escorts have the slightly larger three-spoke steering wheel to replace the XR3’s dinky two-spoke job. When the tri-spoke was introduced it became the universal fitment for all XR3i models, and was later carried over to the Escort RS Turbo. If the 56

vehicle was made after December 1982 the odds are it will have the three-spoke steering wheel and UK owners will find that alot of Y-plate and all A-prefix cars onward have this feature.

Suspension skills The badly-needed improvements in suspension were completed under the SVE supervision of Mike Smith, who worked throughout with the assistance of former Ford commercial vehicle engineer John Hitchens. The latter also oversaw the first 90 days of Escort XR3i production as a troubleshooter. For approximately the first half year of XR3i output the ingenious SVE © suspension modifications were produced, but when the company took the expensive step of fundamentally modifying the bodyshell to allow new suspension mountings, front and rear, the SVE work in cheaply adapting the Escort to a better system was redundant. The SVE spring rates and the use of gas-filled dampers from

Girling, instead of Bilstein, do remain however. The manner in which it all mounts to the car has been different to that originally engineered on all cars made since May 1983. For the XR3i, SVE previewed the use of normal instead of ‘knock knee’ wheel angles on the Escort. They did this by taking the damper tube and setting the lower section at a slight angle, 2 degrees. This allowed the front wheels an upright mounting without the need for expensive tooling changes. For the back suspension SVE modified the lower of two bracket holes that mount the top of the telescopic damper leg. Just 2mm/0.08in inward movement of that mounting point proved sufficient to once more remove the excessive wheel camber angles of the original ordinary and XR Escorts. More fundamental changes were applied to the front ride height, which was reduced 30mm/ 118in, providing unmeasured aerodynamic benefit as well as the intended straighter run for

surface like this was now the weakest point in the XR3i demonstrates its improved handling in 1982. Traction on a dampish Escort XR road manners.

During 1983 the XR3i gained further suspension refinements from the mainstream changes made to the Escort and Orion. Grip on the

smooth

surfaces,

being

explored here by Performance Car’s

Robin

remained much

Bowerman,

the same on

the 185/60 low profile tyres that have been specified since the advent of XR3.

Revised XR3i interior always included the re-trimmed seats and side panels, but three-

spoke steering wheel did not appear on all production models until 1983.

58

Amongst the XR3i_ facia details are the rev-limiter enforced 6,500rpm maximum in a _ layout otherwise unchanged since XR3.

1984 method of external mirror adjustment _ that supersedéd ball-ended lever adjusters; both methods lack the finesse of an electrical system movement, but are better than standing in the rain to alter mirror angles!

59

The XR3i wind-back-and-tilt tinted glass sunroof comes with sliding louvred sunshield moulded in fibre to match the headlining. Sunroof

aperture is generously large, providing XRs_ so-equipped with light, airy interior.

Four-speaker cassette

stereo

system

for

radio/ XR3i

includes joystick fader control alongside spring-loaded

holders for four cassettes behind the gear-lever.

60

the front drive-shafts. The rear end ride height was also lowered, but by a little less: 20mm/ 0.79in. No rear anti-roll bar has ever been specified for the XR3i or XR3, but for the XR3i they compensated for a general lowering in suspension spring and damper stiffness by slightly increasing the diameter ofthe front antiroll bar. Now it measured 24mm/0.94in rather than the original XR’s 22mm/0.87in. ‘We also adopted softer bushes throughout the suspension system’, I was told by the SVE personnel who worked on _ this major improvement in XR3’s handling and ride qualities.

To complement the new gas dampers Mike Smith and John Hitchins selected 125lb/in front springs and deleted the progressive-rate rear springs of the XR3 in favour of a linear 107.5lb/in roughly halved the hardest spring rating of the original car, providing consequent benefits in ride comfort, though without any discernible loss in agility. Incidentally, all the spring rates I have quoted are measured at the wheel, which SVE feel is the only relevant rate to quote.

Engine modifications Fundamentally, the XR3 engine remained as produced from the 1.6 Escort, but both intake es

The 1983-84 XR3i looked much like any other XR Escort to the casual eye, but detail improvements

in suspension

and standard equipment have made the later cars much easier to live with than even the original 1983 XR3i.

A

Say

The most popular Escort body kit in Europe comes from Germany’s Kamei and is dubbed X1. New parts comprise the front spoiler and grille with extended front wheelarch line. Also new are the side extensions, rear spoiler and below rear bumper skirting, plus the small air splitters at either side of the bonnet.

usual fuel cut-off and automatic return of fuel supply found in most current Bosch systems as an economy device: on the Escort the fuel supply is reconnected whenever over-run revs return under 1,400rpm. Ray Diggins was responsible for most of this work (as well as changes to the transmission and drive-shafts). The first plan was to offer fuel injection as an option on the XR3/XR3i line, rather than as the sole replacement model, but this idea was dropped when it was seen that the carburated XR3 engine would provide a useful boost to any XR version of the Fiesta. It is a fact that 200 Fiestas carried out field trials of the CVH engine in the Escort pre-production development programme, and Ford were therefore always very conscious of the super ratio of performance and economy that was available in the CVH/ Fiesta marriage. Unfortunately it took them a very long time to share their knowledge in production trim with the public, as you will read in the next chapter. Finally, the prototype SVE injection system for the XR3i had to be modified to meet the ‘predicted top speed’ claim that the German authorities ask to see demonstrated in the case of any new model. A cold-air addition was necessary to cool the injection side of the motor at high speed from 182km/h (113mph) to 186km/h (115.5mph), but more important to

and exhaust manifolding were completely new. Gordon Prout supervised the replacement pressure die-cast alloy inlet and cast-iron exhaust manifolding (the latter one of the few items that was based on an item from the RS1600i), offering a larger diameter as well as a rather vulnerable run as the lowest point beneath the XR3i. Engineering did not wish to change the standard XR3 9.5:1 compression and even the camshaft remained as originally specified for the XR3. However, the use of fuel injection demanded some ancillary modifications. These included a 70psi electric fuel pump fitted to the lowest practical point on that enlarged 48-litre fuel tank, and the provision of stronger fuel lines

throughout to withstand pressurized petrol delivery. A return fuel line had to be provided for any surplus to be returned from the engine bay to the rear tank. Detail changes covered the use of a 55Amp alternator instead of XR3’s 45Amp unit. Similarly, the battery was uprated to 55Amp in place of the original 43Amp, the fuel pump requiring an extra 11-15 Amperes of extra power in the fuel-injected car. An accumulator pump was also provided to ensure that 70psi was retained ready for use after each start. The main fuel tank pump is only operational when the starter motor provides over 60rpm cranking speed. There is the now62

In April 1984 Performance Car published comparative wind tunnel

tests of some

leading

Escort body kits and concluded: If you're serious, use a wind tunnel — and use it properly. Look not just at drag and lift, but at stability, and all

the effects of running at yaw angles. After all most cars do —

most of the time. Even in

the unrealistic straight ahead condition, quoted by most manufacturers today, tester Jeff Daniels (a former aero industry professional) found

the kits could offer only marginal improvements over the standard XR3i, which they measured at 0.395 in MIRA’s tunnel.

KAT body kit provides XR3i with very distinctive front-end

styling with grille shroud and headlamp covers as well as deep, extended bumper/ spoiler incorporating two auxillary lamps either side of

air intake. Note Escort RS seven-spoke alloy wheels on this example.

63

Bedfordshire-based Grant Accessories

Richard in Britain

offer a number of body parts

which they say will reduce front and rear end lift effect and slightly improve Cd (‘by

13 per cent’).

Front spoiler

and side extensions are most obvious in this kit, which benefited from wind tunnel

and test track experience.

A Richard Grant Accessories XR with all the back end components the company offer, including polyurethane flexible rear spoiler, the fashionable

central

reflector

lens and ASB plastic beneath the bumper.

64

most British XR3i owners was a change in finaldrive gearing. SVE had decided to install the Escort van’s 4.29:1 diffin place of the XR3’s 3.84:1 unit. This allowed a relaxed 3,450rpm in fifth gear at 70mph, rather than the original four-speed XR’s need for nearly 4,000 revs at the UK speed limit,

for the XR3i was geared at 20.29mph per 1,000rpm, rather than 17.89mph. The benefits on German autobahnen were even more pronounced because you could cruise at 100mph and 4,950rpm, whereas you needed to be rugged to withstand an XR3 four-speed’s 5,600revs at 100mph for a long trip. As ever, merely changing a component from one Escort duty to another was not as simple as it looked. SVE swiftly discovered that the van’s 4.29 ratio was specified in a strength suitable for considerably less than the XR3i’s 105bhp and 14.1mkp/102lb/ft torque. ‘We had to specify the manufacture of thicker final-drive gears’, said Rod Mansfield, recalling the cure to a troublesome headache. Compared to the XR3, the XR3i was rated at another 9bhp and 4lb/ft extra torque.

J

x

According to the authoritative Swiss publication Automobil Revue’s annual Geneva Show guide there was a slight weight penalty — composed primarily ofthe injection equipment — which took the quoted kerb weight from 895kg/1,969lb of the XR3 to the XR3i’s 920kg/

2,024lb. In practice the XR3i proved considerably faster than the XR3 in acceleration and usable maximum speed. Precise figures, as for all XR derivatives, will be found in the appendices, but to whet your appetite the XR3i has proved capable ofregularly returning 0-60mph times in the 8.5 to 9-second bracket and one magazine saw a best timed speed of 118mph, which compared with the original XR3’s 113mph under similar circumstances. It was also now a pleasure to exploit the XR3’s turn of speed, rather than undergo a trail of endurance by noise! The official fuel consumption figures for the XR3i did not promise much benefit over the XR3. Ford reported only 26.6mpg from the urban cycle 44.8mpg at a constant 56mph; and 34.9mpg at 75mph in their 1982-83 winter Ss

since 1981. This is the 1985 intercooled Janspeed Engineering in Salisbury have offered turbocharging kits for the XR3 demonstrator with a body kit that looks fierce enough to bite!

Underbonnet view of the Janspeed Turbo XR3i shows neat but long intake tracts from front-mounted turbocharger and intercooler to injection plenum chamber. This latest Janspeed Escort produces 160bhp.

Reflecting the steel/alloy wheel option there were two prices: £6,030 and £6,155. The equivalents two years later were £7,034.70 and

catalogue, but most testers and owners found an

improvement over the carburettor-equipped car. In 15 tankfuls checked on my XR3i I averaged 30.57mpg. An equivalent 10 checks during 1981 of the XR3 that I drove for 25,000 miles came out at 29.88mpg. As a bonus I can go faster at an average of 30mpg in the XR3i than I could have ever contemplated in that four-speed XR3. Either way, I feel that only the Golf GTI has provided such an effective balance between performance and fuel ecomony during most of the Escort XR’s production life, and the Ford has usually been significantly cheaper to buy.

£7,180.63. In other words, waiting 24 months to

purchase a basic steel-wheeled Escort XR3i would have cost an extra £1,034.70, representing an inflation rate of just over 16.6%, rather more than Margaret Thatcher might recall as the escalation in 1982-84 living costs! As the option list still required an evening’s thought in 1982 and could easily command another

£1,000,

the

day

of

the

cheap

performance Escort had long since passed. However, in Ford’s defence I must say that they had kept the option prices within pennies ofthe 1980 figures for the XR3 and it was not long before the standard equipment was upgraded to include a stereo cassette player in addition to the radio.

XR3i prices Using the line: ‘Another shot of adrenalin for the XR3: fuel injection’, the XR3i went on sale officially in the UK from November 4, 1982. 66

Some

XR3/3i bodywork components are present in Martin Schanche’s 1984 European Rallycross Championship Escort, which had over 20 international victories by the close of its 1984 debut season. The winning Escort recipe included a turbocharged 1.9litre Zakspeed-Ford cylinder, offering more

fourthan

550bhp, and a unique fourwheel-drive system designed by former Hewland

engineer

Michael Endean. This very special ‘XR’ prepared by Gartrac in Surrey under the Xtrac name, was _ photographed by Linda Keen after Schanche’s victory at Valkenswaard, August 1984.

Holland,

in

By the time I tried a B-plate 1984 XR3i in Britain, a four-speaker stereo radio/cassette player with joystick control (that had been listed at up to £300.51 as an option) was included in that £7,000 price tag. But Ford will always let you spend more (!) and there was now an electronic radio/cassette option available at £132.12, along with the usual electric window operation (£181.46 in 1984); central locking with

a

penlite

torch

included

in the

were tinted glass (£48.44), inertia-reel rear belts (£100.99) and the £91.62 driving lamps. It still cost more to specify black (£90.72) and metallic

paint finishes (£105.14). Thus, if you ordered a black Escort on alloy wheels with the extras listed above in December 1984, it would have cost at least £8,270.45 without the £116.08 delivery charge, numberplates or road tax. No wonder that discounted cars and personal imports were so eagerly sought after, and that Ford felt no qualms about introducing the Escort RS Turbo at a price beyond £9,000!

key,

Porsche/BMW-style, was £153.29; and the superb tilt-and-slide glass sunroof was now listed at £291.18. Also popular on the option list

67

Prissy

Sane c Se

5 Fiesta XR2 again CVH power and a fifth gear In 1983 UK sales of the ‘Kent’-engined Fiesta XR2 reached toward the levels attained previously by the Escort XR3. Some 11,445 Fiesta XR2s were sold in Britain during 1983, but by July 1984 only 125 of the original XR2 and 165 examples of its planned successor had been registered. Why? Ford marketing director William Camplisson: ‘I think it is pretty well publicized that we got off to a slow start with that one. No problem with the

design,

it’s a great

little car.

homologation people under Geoff Fox. Harry Worrall outlined some of the background to the engineering work applied in the later Fiesta XR in his cultured and precise manner: ‘Obviously we had to pick up where the original 1982 model left off, with the engineering timing closely relating to the introduction of CVH power on mainstream Fiestas. Of course many of us were ex-FAVO, but we had also worked on the Fiesta in respect of a Boreham kit for the race series — when 20 such ‘package’ cars were offered to replace the Escort Mk 2 in one-marque races from 1980 onwards. Mick Kelly and myself also worked on the wider wheels and wheelarch extensions that were picked up from Aveley, given production clearances and used on Fiesta 1300 Supersport. When Bill Meade was at Boreham they had a 1600 kit for the Fiesta, which contributed to our overall knowledge — and we have to remember

However,

somebody left the Type Approval number off the exhaust and we couldn’t sell them in Britain.’ By autumn of 1984 the re-engineered Fiesta XR2 was reaching its RHD customers in volume from the Spanish plant and the signs were that the sales volume of the XR2 in its second skin, with the previous XR3 power plant offering another 12 horsepower over the first XR2, would reach the planned 10% of all UK Fiesta sales. Even though it was badly delayed, British Ford engineers reckoned that it was somewhat ironic that it so nearly beat the CVH-engined Fiesta of 1.3 litres to the UK showroom sales date, for much oftheir planning had been based on lifting detail features from the Fiesta 1300 CVH. In fact the 1.3 CVH Fiesta Ghia made its official debut in May 1984, and the XR2 in June. The second XR2 was the work of a small group within the the enlarged SVE, one headed by Harry Worrall and fully supported by the chassis group under Mick Kelly’s supervision, engine and transmission specialists under Tony Batchelor’s guidance, and working in cooperation with the body, electrical and

that the Fiesta, some 200 examples in the end,

served to develop the CVH engine for the Escort in the first place, so the CVH XR2 was the logical conclusion of much earlier experience gathered by a number of Ford departments. ‘We started work on the XR2 production car as aresult ofa letter authorizing us to investigate aspects of changes that were coming on the Fiesta with the 1984 model-year shape: namely, that the engine bay had been prepared to take diesel or CVH power plants. That was in February 1982. By August of that year we had approval to go ahead with a second XR2 with CVH power. From that point our car and the mainstream 1300 CVH swopped their first 69

< SSS

\

-

*

Matt-black body extension parts for the 1984 Fiesta XR2 included wrap-around front spoiler integrated into the wheelarch and side ‘skirts’. Twin driving lamps and door mirrors were standard.

production fit and finish, plus the exhaust saga. Engineers we spoke to felt the British Marleyfoam company who supplied Fiesta XR2’s spoilers and plastic extensions had an unduly hard time with the manufacturing side of Ford, who were insisting on fits that the company could not reach itself! In the end it was all ironed out, but much valuable pre-production time had been expended, and the Fiesta XR2 had become acommon cliche at European motor shows — on display but not available. The exhaust problem intervened just after production had begun. Again the delay could be traced to demanding Ford internal standards (the Japanese quality example is frequently quoted within the Ford of the 1980s). The particular problem was a rigorous noise test on production XR2s destined for the press in Germany. In 2,000 kilometres/1,242 miles the

production dates so frequently that we could not tell which one would reach the market first. Originally we hoped for October 1983 as the commencement ofproduction — Job 1 as we call it — but this actually occurred on February 20, 1984,’ revealed Mr Worrall. What went wrong? Nothing, in major terms, but the details were enough for UK customers to find that cars they had hoped for on the anticipated sales date of June 7, 1984 were simply not available at the dealerships. Those who had placed their deposits were further frustrated by a spate of road tests in the press glorifying the new XR2, with not a single mention of why the hapless punter could not buy this effective and attractively priced (£5,732) small Ford! Some even switched to the

Peugeot 205GTI that was also tested by many of the English press alongside the Fiesta XR2. The fuel-injected Peugeot cost £6,250 at the time. The new XR2’s delays were a combination of an increased emphasis on manufacturing quality within Ford, particularly regarding

Cologne Pilot Plant couldmake the system fail if

they used a persistent 6,000rpm! This would be a highly unlikely road situation as a five-speed gearbox came with the ex-XR3 96bhp CVH 70

fiv< L a 7 co fi “a < 4 ' The first of the Ford press fleet gets a preliminary work-out before the Donington debut in England, a full six months before

oie

most UK customers were actually able to take delivery

The new XR2 displays the comprehensive hatchback spoiler. Steel wheels are cleverly styled. XR2 logo shows well in white, but in red examples it is almost invisible

71

SY

SRM

UA

es

We BEA met

The sunroof was a popular option, even at nearly £150 (in 1985) and with only lift-ou t or tilting ca pabilities.

72

Alloy

wheels that were standard on the original XR2 became an optional extra on

the new model. These wheels have more of aresemblance to those used on the early Capri 2.81 than to the XR3 and XR4

drilled designs.

engine; one would have to hold fourth, or more likely third, to simulate a constant 6,000rpm under motorway conditions. However, this Ford standard existed and the XR2, which had already sold several hundred in West Germany, had to be re-engineered in respect solely of the rear, absorption-type muffler. The TI group company Cheswick supplied this plastic wool-filled silencer, but even they found it hard to believe that the filling had such a low burn point that it could fail. Ford SVE engineers measured the temperatures within the tail section at high speed and plotted the enormous rpm-related heat increase within. Up to 5,000rpm the temperature was in the 400 to 450 degrees C bracket, whilst at 6,000 revs the

in such an advanced state of production readiness there was no room for any solution that demanded another nine months and resubmission to homologation tests. Harry Worrall recalled: ‘The only room for manoeuvre was in the use of quality ceramic within the system, just the type of material that was woven into the tiles that were fitted on the Columbia space shuttle. It added about £30 to the cost of an exhaust, but it would take 1,200 degrees C comfortably.’ Altogether about six weeks were lost because a lot more testing went on to validate the revised system. I saw a single car running flat-out at the MIRA Proving

Ground one day and wondered what an ostensibly production model was doing in the hands ofa factory tester. Icame to the unworthy conclusion that they were ensuring the press fleet cars really reached the 112mph they claimed! Ford of Germany took three revised XR2s from the Valencia plant and tested them at 6,000rpm even more rigorously, two examples reaching 10,000 kilometers/6,214 miles ‘with

test recorded 650 to 700 degrees C. Such temperatures defeated even the perforated tube and glass-fibre sleeve that SVE first tried as an alternative, for glass-fibre showed signs of degradation from 450 degrees C onwards. An enormous file and a month of intensive further development reflects a spirited SVE assault on the exhaust problem, for with the car 73

A trio of pictures to depict how it feels inside the new Fiesta

XR2 cabin. Highlights include the 140mph and 7,000rpm instrumentation

wrapped

either side of the water and

fuel gauges, plus the oddly styled standard two-spoke steering wheel. Seating is much better than before and interior noise levels are much reduced at motorway speeds compared with the first Fiesta XR2.

74

their exhaust systems intact’, in the words of one engineer, who added sardonically, ‘most of us were quite surprised that you could drive so many CVHs flat-out for so long without any mechancial trouble! We think that says a lot about the inherent strength of that engine.’ That brought the XR2 to Britain and other major markets by the autumn of 1984. It should be noted that the XR2 was also tested for general durability over 40,000 kilometres/24,840 miles

of speeds up to the maximum, which was held for substantial periods. This was completely separate to the exhaust work — so the sustained high-speed ability of the new XR2 has been very thoroughly explored!

Development deviations There were other factors slowing the XR2 replacement. The overall idea of selling a Fiesta with the CVH engine was badly received in some Ford managerial quarters, simply on the basis that ‘every CVH for Fiesta is potentially an Escort customer deprived ...and the Escort, particularly in its more expensive forms, carries more profit’. SVE also underwent enormous changes during the second XR2’s development. Instead of an average 13 specialists to co-ordinate, Rod Mansfield had ‘53 — not all of them in one office’. About a dozen of the larger group were part of Special Vehicle Options, the AngloGerman Germany-based group who provided limited-run vehicles such as Fiesta diesel vans

at the Lommel track. A salt bath test was part of the rigmarole and J should say that I have seen the best of West Germany’s prestige marques reduced to flaky metal by Lommel’s torture chambers. The 1970s Escorts and Capris can be a sorry sight after five years’ harsh UK use (perhaps with a city street ‘garage’ and with unrepaired minor accident damage), but the Escorts and Fiestas of the new generation show up a lot better at the same age. So far as the XR2’s speed and strength was concerned, the company also put it through the usual 16,000 kilometres/9,936 miles sequence 7o

No-nonsense side mirror of new XR2 is internally adjustable by a new type of control. Regulation mirrors are hard to accommodate tidily on a performance car — but vital fitments!

22.9mph per 1,000rpm, or the need for just over 3,000rpm at 7Omph. Quiet, fast, motorway cruising is this Fiesta’s welcome bonus. The relaxed rpm demanded at motorway pace showed up on the’ government fuel consumption figures, which were considerably better than for the original four-speed XR2. Even on the urban cycle 31mpg was recorded — rather better than for either XR3 Escort derivative — whilst a constant 56mph yielded 49.6mpg economy and 75mph was far from ruinous at 37.7mpg. The transmission did require detail adaptation to the Fiestas and XR2 application. Although all the ratios sound familiar they live in Fiesta casings, rather than those of the Escort, and one needs the modified sweep of the 1984 model-year Fiesta chassis side rails to squeeze a five-speed gearbox alongside a_ transverse engine. The drive-shafts are actually those of a

for the Post Office. A visitor can sense that the original close-knit SVE team had to adjust rapidly to new working conditions, even though many of the extra staff were already familiar with each other’s engineering qualities through previous periods at the Boreham Competitions Department, or similar co-operation. The power train that provided a claimed 8mph boost in top speed and the removal of over a second from the original XR2’s capability to sprint from 0-60mph was exceptionally straight-forward. The 9.5:1 compression CVH of 1,596cc with twin-choke Weber carburettor

was as always supplied for the XR3, meaning the provision of 96bhp at 6,000rpm. The engine was mated to the usual 1.6-litre Escort five-speed ratios — only the RS1600i differed significantly — but the 3.583:1 finaldrive ratio was that ofa 1.6 Escort. This meant a bonus in top gear cruising capability at a steady 76

SEER Ke Ne WOW

can:

XR2 took new Fiesta’s unusual long-stemmed facia switches for its more comprehensive dashboard. Lever on door is joystick’

for mirror adjustment.

1300 Fiesta, but the joints are taken from the same source as those for the diesel models. ‘We changed the joint size to get away from some NVH (Noise Vibration Harshness) problems’, reported Harry Worrall, adding: ‘In 1982 for the XR2 there were equal-length drive-shafts, but we find the unequal-length shafts are perfectly OK and there is a possibility that warranty cost will be lower than those ofthe original XR2. As before, we run a lower ride height than the mainstream Fiestas: some 10mm/0.39in less than for the Fiesta 1300. ‘Incidentally, the rack-and-pinion steering is not quite the same for other Fiestas, either. At least the rack is the same, but we restrict the total lock to avoid fouling larger tyres. Thus you find the official lock-to-lock figure is slightly reduced.’ It is indeed, a 17.65:1 ratio allowing a quoted 2.975 turns. Of the suspension changes they had made,

Harry Worrall commented: ‘Because of the lowered production tie-bar layout for the 1984 Fiesta’s front suspension, it provided a better starting point than we had for the first XR2. The only non-standard thing we do really is to lower the ride height. The gas-filled damping for the front struts is from Girling, as itis at the rear, and

as has been the case for the Escort XR3i. ‘We have altered the suspension geometry and spring rates a little. Originally the XR2 wasa Mini-Cooper kind of car; all right up to a point, and great fun, but it drew less favourable comment as the mileage increased. When we came to tackle the second XR2 we believed we had more experience to sort out the settings the public wanted. The 2.8i Capri had hit exactly the balance required by our customers and we saw an opportunity in the second XR2 for smoothing out the rough edges. Our target was to maintain or improve roadholding whilst 1M

A little more

cluttered than

before, the later XR2’s engine

bay accommodates the 1.6litre CVH of Escort XR3 origin quite happily, thanks to mainstream company work on

diesel

and

derivatives,

development

five-speed as

well

as

by — Special

Vehicle Engineering (SVE).

revised by the time full-scale production was possible. Those castor and camber settings are

adding an extra measure of refinement. Personally I think we have met our objective ofa smoother riding car with at least the roadholding of the original.’ At the rear, the five-link beam axle with trailing and Panhard rods was retained, along with the 14mm rear anti-roll bar of the 1300 Fiesta; no bar is needed

dramatically important, as I discovered on a wet

day in a press fleet second-generation XR2. Some of the early cars actually had castor settings over 2 degrees away from the intended angles and this made the first XR2s a twitchy handful in wet weather, especially through puddles and over bumps uphill. The original specification called for 0°39’ castor angle in the unladen state with +1° to -1°15’ tolerance. The

at the front in the

opinion of the company’s mainstream and SVE engineers. The spring rates settled on a stiffish 115lb/in front and 134lb/in rear, but the front suspension castor and camber angles were 78

amended castor angles were 0°29’ with the tolerances biased toward positive castor at +1°15’ to -1°. Similarly, the camber angle recommendation was altered from the original 0°36’ to -0°51’, both figures subject to + tolerance of 1°. Finally, on the suspension and steering, it should be noted that most British XR2s once again reached customers with the Pirelli P6 185/60 HR13 tyres. But, as on the XR3i, there was now a choice of alloy or steel wheels. The alloys were the original design in appearance, whilst the steel units (made by Firestone) carried

anew glass-fibre hubcap design that wore a ring of holes for the XR2 only. In either case the rim width was a generous 6J and the diameter 13 inches. The success of the XR2’s second-generation

j Bee

looks will be judged by the customers. Personally I think Ford may have missed an opportunity to colour co-ordinate the extended spoilers and side pieces in the manner that so many oftheir customers had demonstrated they preferred for the XR4i, which also wore unsubtle large areas of plastic. The bodywork components from Marleyfoam consisted of a wraparound front spoilercum-wheel shroud, wheelarch extensions, ‘running-boards’ and a deeper panel beneath the rear bumper, plus an inverted U-spoiler to embrace the hatchback. No aerodynamic values were quoted for this model; a rather mediocre

(for the period) Cd of 0.40 was quoted for the face-lifted Fiestas on skinny tyres, and it seems unlikely the new XR2 was superior to its less powerful brethren.

ance Car in 1984. Fiesta XR2 on test for Performance ‘ew lock to the long - lead preview j an armful of ter: Art Markus applies at some acceleration intervals and Escort fuel-injected the outrunning Fiesta little the Vinee ee extremely

averaging over 30mpg, despite a top speed over 110mph.

In

1984

the

British

one-

marque series for Fiesta XR2s,

one of the breeding grounds for the XR2 line, permitted the use

of the

new-shape

XR2,

even though it was not on sale during the opening Ford Motor Credit Championship rounds. This is the first such car,

constructed for Mike Smith, the disc jockey, and having its first

run

in

the

author's

hands on February 17, 1984 at Silverstone.

Ford Fiesta European

Cup 1984 was new XR2.

Ladies

based on the Note the

backmarkers — struggle equality

and

the

for

spinner

exiting stage right. Soon to be left, then right!

80

Internally the XR2 contained some clever and laboriously executed details. For example, the 40-litre/8.8-gallon fuel tank was ‘one helluva job’, according to Harry Worrall. ‘The mainstream engineers had such a tank, to replace the previous 34-litre one, in mind for the CTX transmission version of the Fiesta, but when that was postponed, so was the bigger tank. So we squeezed one in ourselves, but we wished we had not tried it when things like the handbrake linkage started to get fouled up.’ The passenger compartment is insulated from the outside world to the same standard as the 1.3 Ghia, and the lighting is from the same source, plus two driving lamps and a pair of rear fog units. Many ofthe trim details are familiar from other Fiestas, including the redesigned facia and fingertip switchgear. Thus there are standard features such as an electric release for the hatchback, lidded glove box, remote-control mirror for the driver and a 60-40-split folding action for the back seats. I also found the door pocket bins and the centre console with a coin slot useful in everyday travel. Although the instrumentation is to the same general standard as the higher-specification face-lifted Fiestas — the XR2 sharing a tachometer only with the Fiesta Ghia — there are unique touches. These cover minor matters such as the use of a 140mph/220km/h speedometer (as appropriate) and a broken

SVE-quoted 840kg/1,848lb did little to obstruct an extremely worthwhile performance bonus over the first Fiesta XR2. In their September 1984 edition, Performance Car recorded 8.9sec

to reach 60mph from a standstill and a 111.14mph maximum in conditions that included a fair breeze. Since they also obtained 31mpg overall, everyone, including Ford of Britain, had reason

to be extremely pleased — especially as the fuelinjected Peugeot 205 was tested in the same issue and was only 0.3sec faster to 60mph and had a top speed advantage of only 4.3mph. These figures were a fair average ofthe results most magazines with accurate fifth-wheel measuring equipment returned, but it should be said that not everyone liked the rather nervy handling, some of which was traceable to those front-end tolerances mentioned earlier in this chapter.

Second-generation XR2 prices Few customers obtained XR2s at the £5,731 quoted at introduction time, though there were some tempting discount and import offers by the 1984-85 winter that took the edge offa price that now officially began at £5,957.38. Popular options included £90.72 for black paint; £147.21 for the retained

lift-out sunroof;

£48.44

for

tinted glass; and £146.15 for the alloy wheel option. An RST 21P push-button radio oflittle merit covered Medium and Long Wave and was coupled to an adequate stereo cassette player with four speakers and the usual Ford ‘joystick’ balance control first seen on the Granada. Overall, the XR2 was welcomed by press and public, although the latter were naturally miffed at the ragged way in which the car became available. But most seemed to think the new model was worth the wait, and former owners of the first XR2 were positively delighted with its suCCeSSOT. When this was written it was too early to tell if this latest XR2 would be the commercial success ofits predecessor. Opposition in this class grows every day and it may well be that Ford will be forced to fit the fuel-injection 1.6 CVH of the XR3i to maintain their position, but if they do that then the Escort XR3i itself will probably have faded in favour of a turbocharged massproduction (as compared to the present limitedproduction RS Turbo) Escort in the widely predicted face-lifted bodywork.

warning line on the rev-counter from 5,800rpm;

the solid red-line is at 6,500rpm. Most important to the majority of customers are excellent front seats with slightly radiused side cushions that retain occupants under higher cornering forces exceptionally well anda rather: odd, offset, steering wheel of the twospoke layout, each spoke interrupted by a large orifice. The all-plastic wheel was simply described as ‘Sports’, but doubtless the purveyors of leather-rim steering wheels will be delighted that Ford have left them an obvious area of improvement. The mixed disc/drum braking system is much as before. The dimensions are: 240mmx20mm vented front discs and 178mmx36.5mm back drums. Ford naturally make a point of stating that both pads and linings are now of asbestosfree friction material. Although the overall weight of the XR2 inevitably rose with the extra equipment provided, the increase from 800kg/1,760Ib to an 81

6 Sierra XR4i The biplane with three doors From the Sierra’s September 21, 1982 launch to its 1984 UK sales performance in a languid fifth place, Ford’s_ rear-drive Cortina/Taunus replacement has attracted controversy. The signs are that some of the messy stuff hurled at Sierra in general has clung to the biplane XR4i, whose sales pace has been far from the sparkling percentages of total sales that we have discussed for Fiesta and Escort XRs. Ford spokesmen in the UK usually point to the LHD Continental market as accepting the Sierra’s carefully rounded lines (standard Cd 0.34) far better than the stuffy old Brits. It is certainly true that the Sierra has out-performed

vigorous marketing ploys coyly called ‘incentives’ by Ford and ‘discounting’ by disgruntled rivals. Writing in 1985, Ford were still offering dealers cash to shift Sierra in Britain, and this applied equally to XR4i, which was frequently purchased at prices representing over £1,000 less than the official listing.

Against this background the XR4i sold 4,508 in the UK in 1983, but it had not completed a full

year as, deliberately, it was not introduced simultaneously with the main range. In fact, the Sierra XR4i went on sale in the UK officially in May 1983. By 1984 the XR4i was outselling the equivalent 2.8-litre Capri, but the percentage of XR4s sold in relationship to total Sierra sales was not considered satisfactory at Ford, and

the Taunus counterpart to Cortina in any Continental sales comparison, but such percentage increases are misleading because the Taunus was an unloved model. The Cortina, for sO many years Britain’s Number 1 seller, was a much tougher act to follow. The 1984 sales year was the second full year of Sierra sales across Europe and_ Sierra production fell 21% from 1983’s 380,000 to

thus further performance derivatives, including the four-wheel-drive XR4x4, were added.

Ford marketing director William Camplisson commented:

1984’s 300,000. Meanwhile, the Escort, Orion

and Fiesta put on production sharply to help the company in the struggle with Fiat for the title of overall Western European sales leader. British reaction to the shape of the Sierra — including the biplane wings of the XR4i — seemed less than enthusiastic. The comparatively slow sales, as judged against those of Cortina, plus the growing success of

more about Sierra XR buyers, about 125 of them

internationally. We asked them what they liked, and what they did not like. There was a scattering of niggles — the twin rear wing, plastic body cladding, but not one item you could put your finger on as the source of discontent. ‘We also went along to people who had bought Saab Turbos, Alfa Romeos and Audi Coupes — and asked them why they had not bought Sierra XR. Nobody said they had not bought because ofthe wings, or the cladding, or

Vauxhall’s front-drive Cavalier (Opel Ascona)

were also points raised during the car’s initial UK

sales

life, which

was

marked

‘Partially, we think this exercise

with the XR Sierra has been a toe-in-the-water task; nobody has been this far up-market witha £9,500 to £10,500 performance car made in real numbers ... we did some research to find out

by some

83

In

September 1981 _ Ford displayed this Probe III fivedoor model at the Frankfurt International Motor Show in

order to get the public attuned to the aerodynamic principles it would be using in the 1982 Sierra. This was a show car constructed after Ford had finalized the engineering of Sierra, not as a prototype. Probe III’s use of the biplane spoiler proved an extremely accurate predication of what offer.

The

double-decker wing credited with reducing

the

XR4i

would

was drag

from 0.31 Cd to 0.29 during

Probe’s development toward the 0.22 Cd final figure. The use of the lower body cladding was

to be part of the Sierra

XR4i recipe as well.

anything definite. We came to the conclusion that ifit had no Ford badge, then they might well have bought it!’

Capri (125mph versus 128), but slightly slower in acceleration owing to the Capri’s lower weight and different overall gearing. If you wonder why Ford decided to give themselves the constant headache of comparisons and possible lost sales between a pair of 2.8-litre three-doors, then you will not be surprised to learn that Ford in Germany did not plan the XR4 as a 2.8-litre at all. It was going to be a 2.3-litre

XR4i development The 2.8-litre Sierra XR4i is a fast car, the quickest XR of all at close to 130mph in independent tests, with 0-60mph acceleration that Performance Car measured at 8.6sec. In broad terms within a Ford spectrum it is slightly faster at the top end than the well-loved but aged

V6 Hans

84

Gaffke,

former

chief

of

vehicle

engineering for the Sierra range, took up the XR4i tale for me at an interview arranged late in 1984. We talked on the day when he came to look over the SVE operation prior to taking responsibility for that area, along with his current title as Chief Engineer, Development Engineering. ‘We had always planned to make a sporty In spring of 1983 the XR4i was ready

for announcement

in

Britain. Ogilvy & Mather, Ford of Britain advertising agents, thought that technical aspects were

of primary

interest

in

promoting the XR’S performance theme. There was also a TV campaign for the car, shot on location in a Californian

State

Park,

featuring the XR4i in slow motion to the Chariots ofFire theme.

Terry Collins’ Ford cutaway of the first Sierra XR emphasizes the independent rear suspension, boot floor location for the standard alloy wheel, and the fact that back

drum brakes were retained even on this 130mph model.

|

a

version ofthe Sierra, one in which there was not only more power, but also many other improvements. Perhaps the most important thing we decided in the development was that it should still be a comfortable car. Sure, we could have made it with suspension like a rock to go round corners like a race car, but there would have been no comfort. So this was a most

Sierra front suspension was different to normal Ford practice

of the period, mounting the anti-roll bar behind the strut-suspended front wheels.

d P75,

Nii

ap~

OM

TS"

ee

aS =

—\

iS) oe

a

-

[|

=

2

.

a

\

N¢ A

Only the XR4i was specified amongst the original Sierra range with a rear anti-roll bar,

which

straddles

the

semi-

trailing arm rear suspension. This Saed the principles of the 1970’s Ford Granadas, but

was based on brand new components and weighed substantially less.

Gm ae =J Ang Mm — Ss Z ARANRARUNET Eo) Bis nt

aAWe uf Ca MO) UJ

important decision. ‘But the main thing was that engine change.

130bhp from a fuel injection version of the 2.3 but when it was hitched up to the five-speed

Right up until May 1982 we were going with a more powerful 2.3 version of our V6, but it was

gearbox and in the car, we could see there was a real problem — just no torque! There was no fifth

not right for the car. On paper we could have

gear response at all.’ Hans Gaffke was able to 86

laugh at that in 1984, but at the time Ford of Europe Chairman Bob Lutz was extremely concerned that the 2.3 engine got its chance as the XR4 power plant. You do not laugh away that kind of influential interest inside Ford . . ‘That 130 horsepower was quite hard to reproduce in mass-production with complete reliability. Iknew I could guarantee 125bhp with Bosch fuel injection, but because of the poor torque we ended up with about 196km/h [121.7mph]. The target was to reach at least 200km/h [124mph] and we had the ridiculous problem that a normal 2.3 V6 with carburettor

with the ignition and the air intake and it goes 192/193km/h [119.8mph], but we physically cannot make this thing go any faster. We go round and round Lommel, but it is no good. ‘I say to Bob Lutz,

and 115bhp, like you have in some Sierras, would give 192km/h [119mph], because the

torque was not that much different to the fuel injection 2.3. ‘T tell you we tried quite a few things to make that smaller engine work. We even did a quick experiment with the American four-cylinder 2.3 and turbo, but this car didn’t last very long under European driving conditions. In fact the Americans were beginning to receive what amounted to a four-cylinder 2.3 Turbo XR Sierra when this was written, but the Federal emission-regulated machine wore the Merkur badgework, rather than XR, by the time it reached the customers. Hans Gaffke resumed the engine story: ‘I

for the XR4i, because of the differing exhaust systems.

Even with the 2.3-litre engine it had been planned that the double-decker rear wing layout and extra aerodynamic panels should be added to the XR Sierra. In 1981 the Probe III aerodynamic study was widely shown to test public reaction. ‘This was positive, so we proceeded along those lines,’ said Hans Gaffke. Our engineering guide continued: ‘At first we had planned a full underbody shield with just the muffler free, but this was not feasible. However, we could take the double wing and use that without production problems. Itis nota gimmick, this wing set-up, for on a hatchback design you do not get air separation that you need for stable speed. This takes place quite a

could see we could be in trouble with Mr Lutz if we could only manage 196km/h with the 2.3. It had to be 200. So how could we deliver? ‘In May 1982, at Lommel, we made some tests with good pre-production examples of the basic Sierra range and this damn 2.3 XR Sierra. It would not go! We got about 187/189km/h [117mph max]. So we make some adjustments

The

biplane

countered

rear

wing

the criticism levelled at the Sierra’s crosswind stability on motorways and dual carriageways,

most

but

of

a_

Iam very sorry we can’t get

this animal going; I think I know why, but I am very worried we will not be able to get the power we need for the speed predicted. Mr Lutz was certain we must have the 200km/h. We needed this kind of speed to go with the looks. ‘The 2.8i was the only quick alternative. It took us about six weeks to re-engineer the package. The engine mountings were the same; it was a bit ofa tight squeeze to get it all in but it fits. The airbox and the engine specification itself was the same as in the Granada and Capri, but we had to change the exhaust system of course. That is completely unique and uses a 45mm diameter instead ofthe 2.3’s 42mm bore’. It is rated at 160 in the Capri instead of 150bhp

single

blade is just as effective in this respect. However, for ultimate top speed and aerodynamic figures the twin wings served a purpose beyond more decoration.

87

Scene

of

sporting

so

many

publicity

Ford

pictures

since the 1960s, Brands Hatch racing circuit forms the background for this picture of a Sierra XR4i.

The XR4i’s door body was not shared with any _ other

production model, as can be seen from this picture of the 1983-84 Sierra L three-door.

This

body continued

in XR

production for left-hand drive markets whilst Britain moved >=2, KASD

RC O» | oo \ Xe

RS ‘s: a re Sate

,ON

much of the transfer box space, was moving the speedometer drive pick-up from its Ferguson home in the transfer box to read off the front wheels — a principle we use elsewhere in the Ford range. ‘The gearbox, like the 150bhp V6 engine, is a standard component and has been seen in Granada, Capri and XR4i. It is a normal five-

of the front end it was possible to move the antiroll bar back to original Sierra principles, behind the front wheel line; that bar is of XR4i 26mm diameter. We use Sierra-type drive-shafts, the outboard front drive parts are partly Escortderived, and the inner joints share Sierra ancestry. ‘A crucial item for us, and one that saved so

104

XR4x4 cutaway emphasizes how the principal elements of

Sierra design — front engine, rear drive, independent suspension — were retained along with new features. Most important ofthese, apart from the two Viscous Control differentials, were extensively modified front suspension and

the adoption ofsolid rear disc brakes to complement the standard

ventilated

front

production

150bhp trim, but

discs. The engine was left in the installation was modified

to allow more space beneath the nose of the motor.

the answer to that was to pack it away tidily ina new alloy case.’ Another packaging problem was to leave sufficient space for the front drive-shafts to rise

speed unit, whereas the transfer box was something to which we and Getrag devoted much development time. We especially like the Morse chain drive to transfer power down to the forward propeller shaft and we found that ATF [Automatic Transmission Fluid] was the best lubricant. The starter motor was a tough problem in terms of its new offset location, and

and fall with suspension movement,

and that

necessitated small cut-outs in the side chassis rails. That new alloy cross-member survived not only the Ford quarter-million stress cycle test,

105

2,611.6mm/102.8in

but went on to record over a million cycles without failure. It also had to prove itself in kerb tests, 15mph/12G crash tests with body and running gear and the legal requirement ofa fullblooded 30mph crash test. A by-product is that front-end stiffness is much improved and provides a much better base on which to produce an attractive handling and finelysteered car. New track control arms [TCAs] were needed and they were mounted in hard plastic joint assemblies inboard, rather than the original car’s compliant rubber bushes — the feature alone boosting the precision and sensitivity of power-assisted steering. A standard Sierra variable-ratio rack-and-pinion system is used, but the casing is new and so is the mounting. Internally the rack co-operates with a replacement steering column shaft to suit its new position and the length demanded by that repositioning. Although there are new suspension arms front and rear, changes to the suspension have been made only to achieve the best camber angles and other geometric details to suit 4wd.

a

Ford

the back the inclusion of rear disc brakes — solid units rather than the standard vented discs found at the front — stretched the XR4x4’s track to 1,481.7mm/58.3in in place of the XR4i’s 1,466mm/57.7in.

These subtle changes came with the fourwheel-drive conversion, as Ray Diggins explains: ‘You can see that the front struts are mounted at anew angle, but the reason is simply that the bottom mounting point is completely different to that required on a rear-drive car. So the strut mounts from its new position, slightly forward of the orginal lower point (thus the slight growth in wheelbase) and runs up to the standard location, high on the wheelarch.’ Ray Diggins said there were three distinct phases in the transmission development. ‘Late in 1982 we had the first FFD concept car and it took about another four months to produce the other three. We sat down and puzzled out those transmission and engine changes_ to accommodate the new hardware and with the help of Getrag we had our first prototype running in December 1983, with all the right stuff. ‘With the manufacturing part complete it was time to test the durability. We did havea problem with an epicyclic gear seizing on a shaft, but needle idler bearings helped us overcome such seizures. So far as the transmission was concerned, we naturally went through all the permutations of fluid viscosity and the percentage filling of the Viscous Control elements in the system, plus practical development work to assess the effects of changing front to rear power split: in fact our gut feeling for one-third front and two-thirds rear, a 2:1 ratio of the power delivered by the epicylic gears, proved very close to the 34% front and 66% rear that was our final choice. ‘Although we included a viscous-coupled limited-slip differential at the back, there were a large number of items from the XR4i that we

However, this alone represented a major task,

geometry.

Thus we find a modest 12% uprating in front spring rates and the usual Fichtel and Sachs damping further developed to give a good ride, as well as sporty cornering. At the rear the progressive-rate Sierra springs of the XR4i have been retained, but the ride height is down 10mm for both aesthetic and handling reasons. A new anti-roll bar of 14mm, instead of 10mm,

was used at the back, providing considerably flatter cornering characteristics. Inevitably, the change to 4wd has altered some key XR4i characteristics. The weight is up to 1,270kg/2,800lb on the British five-door, which compares with 1,205kg/2,656lb for the

two-wheel-drive original; a fairer comparision is three-door

with

altered from the 1,452.2mm/57.2in frontal span of the XR4i to the 1,475mm/58in of XR4x4. At

and Mac Powell spent three months on the computer working on suspension and steering

with the new

compared

engineering figure of 2,608mm/102.7in for the XR4i. Similarly, front and rear track figures

on the Continent,

which is just 45kg heavier than the XR4i at 1,250kg/2,755lb. For the 4wd models the weight

is split 680kg front to 590kg back on the UK 4x4, and 675kg front to 535kg rear on the lighter lefthand-drive model. There were also important dimensional changes. The wheelbase was up fractionally at

continued to use, including the usual 3.62:1 final

drive and the 195/60 VR tyres.’ In fact, the wheel sizes remained as before,

but the 5.5 x 14in alloys were of the seven-spoke 106

Interior of the XR4x4 emphasized the sober image Ford had chosen to complement the car’s advanced engineering features. Seating and access is improved in the five-door UK model, and the facia is simplified compared with the more extrovert XR4i.

RS style rather than the multi-hole equipment of the Sierra XR4i. As this is written, tyres from Uniroyal, Pirelli and Dunlop were expected to be approved, but Goodyear’s NCT was missing from the list of tyres offered on the XR4i. Much of the development work was carried out on Uniroyals. No significant performance advances over the XR4i were claimed. You simply had to drive the car, even for just a few miles, in order to echo Rod Mansfield’s sentiments: ‘I thought fourwheel-drive for road cars was a gimmick until we started working on this Sierra. I am now absolutely convinced that it is the way to go, particularly for the kind of performance cars we engineer here at SVE, because of the complete stability and security produced — and the sheer efficiency with which four driven contact patches get power to the road. ‘As an example of that, it’s not just the fact that traction is so good. Of course the level of grip is transformed, but we have also found that what Audi say about fuel economy actually improving is true. The gain is so small that we may not quantify it in our literature, but it is still

the complete opposite to the effect you would imagine from fitting extra gears and other friction-increasing devices. Actual fuel economy improvement has been beyond our brief to establish, but it is all to do with the

torque being transmitted through four contact patches instead of two.’ Despite of the single-spoiler rear end and fivedoor bodywork, the XR4x4’s top speed appears to be matching the XR4i’s 130mph. Final figures had not been established when this was written,

but the offset of four-wheel-drive efficiency against increased weight looked to have produced a 0-60mph time of 8.1 sec, again the same as for the XR4i. The difference lies in the fact that the car handles all commands so stably and efficiently. Be sure it could handle an extra 50bhp with absolutely no trouble. A fine chassis always feels as though it could take more power, and this Sierra feels as though it could take everything Ford could produce. . .

Ford 4wd in action I am uncomfortably aware that it is nearly 15 years since I used to stand amidst the snow and 107

Gone are the XR4i’s lower panel plastic cladding and red insert stripes: now there is very little to distinguish the XR version from high-specification Ghia Sierras. Seven-spoke RS wheels are one of the few concessions to extra style for the all-wheeldrive Sierra.

Similarly, it was a relief to dispense with the XR4i’s bright green electronic displays and just get on with the job of easing it gently on toa route of fast main roads and bumpy average British B-roads. I could feel a little more resistance at the steering wheel rim than would

slush of British rallycross courses, watching in awe as Roger Clark and brother Stan, plus demolition demon Rod Chapman, ran the first competition all-wheel-drive Fords. All had over 220bhp; 250 was quoted for Roger’s Lucasinjected 3.1-litre V6. They overcame 5 to 10second four-wheel-drive penalties to sweep through fields of innocent Minis and tractionless Escorts. The contrast with today’s 4wd Sierra could not have been greater. Instead of the beast tuned to last for barely three minutes of competition, here was the reassuring beat of Ford’s 150bhp V6. It hummed to drive the wheels of the righthand-drive black XR4x4 I was able to drive well ahead of its public announcement. This Sierra’s docile manners complemented looks that are now sober in the West German mould. The Mallory grey fabric trim was restful and familiar; I actually had to look very hard at the transmission tunnel before spotting the slight bump that has been necessary to ease in all the new components.

have been the case in the rear-drive model, but

otherwise this Sierra’s 4wd secret was safe. On the move, between 40 and 70mph, the

steering continues to be informative and guides the car with a great deal more precision than I remember from the half-dozen or so XR4i threedoors I’ve driven. The front end immediately turns into a corner, even if you approach at the sort of speed that provides mental images of 4wd cars on full-lock understeer. There is no doubt that the Ford-Ferguson alliance has produced a significantly better 4wd system. For ordinary use there is the complete confidence that comes with the Sierra’s absorbent ride over even wicked bumps and the non-slip progress of the wheels. Drive consciously beyond the limits ofa normal Sierra 108

and

the 4wd

just keeps

going where

you

intended; no fuss, no bother.

Inevitably there is increased transmission noise with two extra driven wheels and a similar bonus in differentials, but even coasting in neutral failed to highlight anything that could ys

ae

ays

seriously bother an owner — this on an example that had already worked hard for its living. The noise increase is not marked; passengers demanded the coasting technique to be sure of the difference ... The driver notices the absence

of the rear

ae

: tsis thisthi three:- door body, the form in which XR4x4 is supplied to left-handgimmicks ior gimmicks absence of exterior the 1983 and October 1984 (see page 88), spring between Britain in sold were bodyshell this with path inane cren Be Sa but not in XR form and without a rear wing.

Four-wheel-drive transforms the high-performance Sierra’s stability and overall security on motorways and cross-country roads, not only in extreme off-road conditions. Nevertheless, it is at its most dramatic in the snow, and the 1985 winter gave Ford an ideal chance to show it off and win converts to the four-wheel-drive principle.

narrower wheels and tyres for this model: ‘You never seem to run out of grip on this set-up, so we could gain on resistance to aquaplaning in wet weather and in sheer speed with a narrow cover’, they argued. In the past Ford have not been famed for ride quality, but the signs are that SVE have made significant progress, along with the mainstream company, in the last two years. The Escort RS Turbo is actually more comfortable than an XR3i in this respect and not far from the bumpabsorbing qualities of an ordinary Escort 1.6. The Sierra 4x4, with its thicker rear anti-roll bar, maintains the even keel of a sporting car, whilst breezing over crests and bumps with self assurance. Its insulation qualities will endear it to every driver who uses what is provided, but who does not appreciate the old sporting

‘biplane’ immediately and the bonus in easy rearward vision should not be underestimated. But it is the bonus in cornering capability and sheer fun that sold this Sierra to me. At whatever speed you approach a corner, the 4x4 shows little sign that it wants to slide out of line. This also applies to the exit from corners, even if you are using full engine rpm in second ona slippery surface. I have a Ford test driver’s word that any tendency toward tail-sliding, when power is suddenly removed during a corner, is very gentle — and that is a distinct contrast to many machines with trailing-arm rear suspension. On a loose surface Ford SVE have set the car up with sufficient balance that it can be twiddled around in old Escort-style opposite lock, but covering the ground rather more efficiently! Some SVE engineers favoured going over to 110

tradition of punishment by a ride producing a jarring, double-vision illusion of travelling fast. Overall I was most impressed with this Ford interpretation of the all-wheel-drive performance car. It is much easier, and a lot safer, to drive using all the engine power than before. Yet

it is also comfortable, serviceable and useful.

Whether it is affordable I could not judge at press time, but since the only other performance 4wd choices at that time came from Audi there seemed a good chance that Ford might be offering UK buyers more sophistication for less

money.

| employed over 50 people, and new products seemed ever more numerous. Here Engineering | | | Vehicle 1985 Special By spring| by seven SVE-developed cars, including XR2 in both body shapes and the surrounded stage centre Fees Bod Massteld five-door form), the latest and most advanced project to appear. UK (in XR4x4 to Escort XR3i. Pride of place goes

111

8 X-rated action Behind the wheel of the

performance Fords

Most of my road mileage in XR cars has been in the Escort models with their charismatic combination of enjoyable economy and exciting handling, but it was the Fiesta that started my experience of the XR formula with two prototypes of the XR2 in the summer of 1980. Almost two years before the first ‘Kent’engined XR2 went on sale, Ford’s British Competitions Department had put together the key ingredients for 20 Fiestas to form the nucleus of the 1980 Debenhams Fiesta Challenge, and I was invited to drive one of the cars at Oulton Park. To transport me to and from the Cheshire circuit, Ford press officer Barry Reynolds provided LVX 909V, a dark blue Fiesta with rectangular lamps, but a 90bhp ‘Kent’ crossflow heart of 1.6 litres. In fact, the engine was extremely close to the specification that was finally rated at 84bhp in the XR2 and the performance — rest to 60mphin the 9-second bracket and a 105mph maximum — was exactly as expected. Naturally, it had a fourspeed gearbox and the 6 x 13in wheel size with 185/60 Pirelli P6 tyres accurately foretold the

guises, came with the ex-Escort 1.6/XR vented

disc, which was equally effective and generally provided a firmer pedal action. Although I enjoyed this 1.6-litre Fiesta prophet enough to drag the fuel consumption down to a best of 25.5mpg, a breakdown caused

by a broken rotor arm in the distributor finished off that first encounter abruptly. Thus the warmer memory was of the racer, which was 10th fastest in practice from 15 starters, which were all covered by 33 seconds — including the car of then budding saloon car ace, Steven Soper. I finished the race just inside the top 10 with a best lap time a second adrift of Soper’s new record, which tells you all you need to know about how easy these 190 VR Dunlopshod cars were to get to know. The only tricky part was the brakes, which had a very spongy feel to the pedal, something that had not gone

away completely when I tried DJ Mike Smith’s new-shape XR2 in 1984. A ‘proper’ XR took me through the week connecting 1980 and 1981, Motoring News having a bright red XR3 demonstrator for what turned into a two-page spread. The fact that they devoted so much space to the car accurately reflected the enormous enthusiastic interest there was in the performance front-drive Ford Escort. Inevitably, much of the copy was devoted to

future XR specification. However, the wheels

were the then-popular four-spoke FAVO type sold by RS dealers, rather than the XR2’s own alloy design. In the suspension this road car did vary from the XR2 in that it had a front anti-roll bar — as did the racers of that period — and the springs were far harder than those eventually employed, whilst the brakes were the bigger RS solid disc type that were also used for the racers until at least 1984. Normally the XR2, in both

comparisons with the rear-drive Escort RS2000,

one of the most derivatives that are enthusiasts. In fact performed at much 113

respected of the Escort particularly loved by rally the 1.6-litre XR3 generally the same rate as the 2-litre

By 1977 Ford had developed a series of sporting parts for the Fiesta, seen here, which became the basis of the Rallysport X-packs and subsequently provided the basis for many ofthe features seen in today’s XR2. Here the author has a Brands Hatch chance to drive a Ford Boreham-developed Fiesta 1300S. Even on 1970s production tyres, the little Fiesta returned lap times comparable with those of 1.6-litre road cars several years later.

this grovelling was something of a celebrity in the neighbourhood, and for six months people would stare or come over and ask questions like: ‘Wottle she do? Is it any good? Is it faster than a

RS, but was nothing like so well sorted in the

handling and ride departments in its original guise. By the time MN were able to print their lengthy findings [January 22, 1981] the price had risen several hundred pounds over the £5,123 tag of November 1980. This fully-equipped demonstrator would have retailed at more than £6,200. That made the test conclusion inevitable: ‘Ford has picked its niche with its usual skill. However, at this price it would have been better if the company had introduced its first production five-speed gearbox and fuel injection. Features that are offered for very little more as standard equipment by VW on the Golf

Gil?’ Actually it was not the outright performance that impressed, for the CVH has always been a lusty animal rather than a smooth and torquey power source of the Golf GTI ilk. First impressions were of a tremendous improvement in paint and trim qualities achieved by Ford, and economy that hit 35mpg during a lady’s running-in session, and rarely sank below 27mpg however hard I tried. The ride was horrific over the bumpy roads of

GTI.

the Thames

However, I enjoyed the road test car so much that I cajoled the owners of Motoring News into buying such a car — so that we could see if it would last, or some such flimsy excuse. Even in April 1981 the silver car I acquired as a result of

enough to get another set of rear Bilsteins. It took a little bit of the rear end jogging out, but neither ‘my’ car nor a five-speed’ carburettor XR3 I borrowed were really at home over bumps. I think some Ford personnel have still to 114

Valley, and I complained

loudly

SE

BBLS

ae

In 1980 JW was

allowed

to

drive a prediction of how the

Fiesta XR2 would appear in production. The 1.6 litre ‘crossflow’ Kent engine was in

slightly more powerful trim than the 84bhp claimed for the first XR2,

but the four-speed

gearbox combined

and 185 _ tyres to provided an

exhilarating preview of a car

that became the closest 1980s production counterpart ofthe Mini-Coopers of the 1960s. This demonstrator was finished in dark blue with a

lighter blue the Ford invented.

side-stripe that press garage

An XR prototype weekend. the striped road car with sunroof on tilt position shares the Oulton Park, Cheshire, paddock with the number 8 racer loaned for this 1980 race meeting. The racer had the

best part of 20 extra horsepower and provided the most enjoyable one-marque competition the author has experienced. Excellent

handling and the ability to reach 100mph in surprising places were the key qualities.

115

]W’s first XR3 had a cushy life! Seen during the 1981-82 winter, this XR ploughed through two seasons of rally coverage for Motoring News (thus the necessity of quality lighting from Cibié) and proved as quick as some of the non-intercooled Escort 1.6 turbo conversions carried out by some specialists of the period! It spent the best part of a year in a local garage when partexchanged for the XR3i, but it was recently sold to a near-neighbour.

forgive me for writing that their version of IRS was worse in ride quality than many of their also unloved live axle suspensions!

something over 25,000 miles recorded, and a

similar-looking silver XR3i directly replaced it. That takes us into 1983, by which time [ had been lucky enough to spend a week on the beaches of Wales (adjacent to Pendine Sands) driving a pair of XR2s fora TV commercial. The idea was to make them slalom ski-style, which meant you could drift them in gorgeous broadsides at speeds up to 80mph, providing you did not get too close to the sea, when the inevitable result was a quick spin into the briny ... The Fiestas would then chug back on to dry land with Schwimmerwagen nonchalance! The XR2s obviously provided better handling at high speed than the Escort, owing to the more consistent behaviour of the beam axle, and I came away ready to seek out a demonstrator ata Donington test day. This was driven around the Leicestershire circuit, as well as on the road, and I was impressed enough to heartily endorse the choice of three such cars that were run by members of the Motoring News/Motor Sport/

Service costs Overall, our four-speed XR3 had a tough life, covering a few international rallies with a full load of passengers (when it was distinctly improved in ride; Ford performed their ride evaluations in Germany with fully laden cars ..) and remained reliable. But service costs were higher than expected. Headlamp units, at over £30 a side, were both replaced, as was the

exhaust system. The original Dunlop D3s stayed on for only 17,000 miles, too badly worn by the

extreme camber angles to safely continue. Against all this the car depreciated ‘only’ by some £1,000 during my tough tenure and never failed to finish ajourney, or start promptly, even when covered in 3 inches of snow. It was sold to a local garage,who swore it was the fastest XR3 they had ever had on their books, with 116

Ford launched the RHD Sierra XR4i in Mulhouse (ironically home to Pe irae re ae so that we could drive in France and Germany on the same day, gawping at the gigantic Schlump Bugatti collection by night. I had my wrist splapped

for subsequently writing that the XR4i decor was ‘OTT’ (Over The Top) by Ford’s senior European Public Affairs supremo. The urge to write ‘I told you so’ after seeing XR4x4 was overwhelming.

LAT organization in the early 1980s. An XR2 is an excellent choice for anyone getting the taste for performance hatchbacks: the ingredients are all well-known and generally reliable. The handling and braking are good enough to keep most young chargers pleasurably entertained XR2 snags? Like the Escort, the four-cylinder engine can be tiresome in motorway use, and there was no alternative to the four-speed gearbox. The interior was not as thoroughly converted as for the Escort, or later XRs, and most people who want to sell them merely seem to have grown out of the rather basic accommodation and a chassis that begs for more

better than the much-vaunted (and valued) RS1600i, with the exception of the RS front seating and the superior front-end traction of the Motorsport-developed Ford. The point was that the RS1600i was closely based on the original XR3 during development and it exaggerated a lot of the original failings through having even more power (115bhp versus 105 for the XR3i and 96bhp for the XR3) and wider, squatter, tyres. Thus the RS1600i was

so twitchy when driven hard over cambered roads that even

wayward

a BMW

manners

executive, used to the

of the

Bavarian

speed

machines in the wet, was moved to comment,

‘that thing’s lethal!’. It certainly was not, but I preferred the quieter exterior of the XR3i to the RS1600i, and reckoned I could always improve the seating and suspension of the XR... So an 8,000-mile XR3i was purchased from a local garage in September 1983. That car sits outside my house as this is written, now registering 24,856 miles, and I have

power. Once again a winter Christmas/New Year test, this time in 1982-83, sold me an XR3. I had the RS1600i and the XR3i one after the other, using the original four-speed XR3 to transport me to and fro. There was no doubt in my mind that the XR3i represented a tremendous allround improvement over the XR3. I also liked it 7

XR4i’s suspension slightly, so not all the improvement was down to the tyre choice. However, for sheer grip without too much loss of the Sierra’s good-natured and comfortable ride, I think the Goodrich product is worth a try. Of the Sierra XR4i, I find it hard to comment without bias. Driving it under privileged circumstances in the States — Mustang drivers screamed across the bows of our black biplanes

enjoyed all of them a lot more than in my first XR3. Very little has gone wrong; inevitably, whenI came to write this, the interior mirror ‘fell ‘orfin me’and’, but otherwise it just had to have the injection plumbing checked under a nationwide recall (the engine bay connectors are in metal rather than plastic now, to guard against pulling apart). Iwas rather stupid in not transferring my Pioneer 25 Watts-per-channel cassette player and Cibié driving lamps from the first XR3, both of which I miss, along with the Goodyear NCTs. In fact I did transfer the alloy wheels and NCT tyres from my old car to the injection model, but the camber angles had been so extreme on the earlier car that it was not long before the tyre edges wore rapidly in their new upright position! I decided to try Uniroyal 340 covers in the usual 185/60 sizing, but have not been as impressed as I expected to be. Wetweather grip is not particularly good, even with less than 5,000 miles’ wear, and the dry-weather squealing is a contrast to the Goodyear NCT’s sibilant progress under duress. I found the Uniroyal experience puzzling, for one smashing task in 1983 had been to drive a pair of XR4i Sierras in another TV commercial that just happened to be based outside San Francisco. We had rotten weather and even the presence of The Queen ona State visit could not prevent rain and fog being our daily

and demanded, ‘what the hell kind of Fords are

those?’ — I can only say I enjoyed hurling it about and had no qualms about the lift-off, tailout, oversteer slides that other journalists said were a problem. Reading such things back in Britain, I borrowed another XR4i from Ford on asummer day. I tried to recreate the exact cornering circumstances that used to cause my similarly trailing-arm rear suspension BMW 528 to throw itself across the road with heart rpm-boosting rapidity. In fact, the Sierra was a lot more manageable than my own BMW, or most of the loaned BMWs had been, but that does not mean I would buy an XR4i in preference to a 5281. The Ford is much better value for money and does a lot of things a BMW does with commendable grace, but it hasn’t that beautiful straight-six engine, four-wheel disc brakes or a build quality that makes you proud to spend such outrageous sums of money as BMWs command in the UK. My feeling is that £10,000-plus motor cars from BMW/Mercedes-Benz will depreciate a lot less quickly than a Sierra XR4i. If I was lucky enough to be buying in that class again, accountant and I would probably still select outside the Ford range, although the XR4x4 could change all that... As an everyday companion and long-distance tourer the XR4i is comfortable, decently quick and well laid out internally. I can imagine customers Owning one and choosing another to succeed it, particularly as the discounted prices are so tempting. Just do not expect a warm surprise when it comes to trade-in time! Most recent XR mileage has been in the CVH Fiesta XR2. This caused just as much interest as my first XR3, particularly with under-30-yearolds peering in the windows for a better view. Naturally, previous XR2 customers, such as those at Motoring News, were almost fanatically interested.

environment. Under such conditions, driven as

hard as possible on a private road that is reserved for the use of the film and photography business, the Sierras behaved superbly on Uniroyals (195 VR for the bigger Ford). So I would unhesitatingly recommend the Uniroyal for the Sierra, where standard covers are fitted.

Tyre choice This tyre option is backed up by experience of a brace of 200-horsepower turbocharged XR4is that I drove in 1983 and 1984. Both were genuinely capable of 140mph and tearing to 60mph in the 7-second bracket, but the AVJ model (tested for Cars & Car Conversions, July 1984) came on standard Dunlops (D3) and wailed haplessly at its fate, whilst the Janspeed car of similar power (Motor Sport, September 1983) was a manageable revelation on 205/50 VR front and 225/50 VR rears from B.F Goodrich. Naturally, Janspeed had also fitted wider wheels, and they had also lowered the 118

The intercooled Janspeed Turbo XR4i and its 200bhp version Ofthe faithful Ford 2.8 V6 impressed everyone who tried the car. I drove the original demonstrator shown here, before it was virtually written off in a London suburb, but a subsequent example also provided top speeds close to 140mph and 0-60mph in seven seconds. Those. large Compomotive alloy wheels were shod with BF Goodrich tyres that were wide enough to fill the standard

arches,

whilst

the

clever colour-coding job (particularly in white) became a minor cult for Sierra XR4i

owners.

119

Using my XR3i as a camera car, Norman Hodson of Cars & Car Conversions snapped this pair of rear drive XRs from Gartrac in Surrey. Both had V6 motivation, the white race car over 400bhp from 3.4 litres, and the second road car a standard 2.81. Today Gartrac are better known for the fourwheel-drive rallycross turbos within stretched XR bodywork, 550 horsepower devices that make even these exciting Escorts look lethargic.

Mike Smith’s 1984 Fiesta Championship XR2 felt like a

winner when I drove it preand turned out as a

season

victor for the blond DJ during a tough debut season.

Although I had one terrifying run in the wet

figure speeds and still return close to 30mpg, returning to base a lot less tired than in the Escort. The noise intrusion at speed, or around 4,000rpm, is less wearing in the Ghia-padded Fiesta than in the Escort XR. I must accept Ford’s assurance that customers

with one of three new XR2s I have tried so far, I

must say that I think this car represents XR motoring as its absolute best. The price is reasonable, the fuel economy excellent and the

sheer speed astonishing. You can cruise at three120

Author’s mobile office: a TWR four-spoke steering wheel and tasteful interior

litter are the only modifications made

to my Escort XR3i.

From the first batch of German-made XR3i Escorts,

the author’s example went toa prosperous first owner, who ensured that all the popular Ford

extras,

minus

central

locking, were installed. The result is a sports saloon that is very easy and economical to own.

in the wet for safe and brisk progress to be made. Some journalists also noted that the steering was Odd on first race circuit acquaintance, this despite dry conditions and a carefully-prepared fleet of Ford press cars.

have not suffered the same steering quirks as some of the early press cars exhibited; these problems were caused either by _ the manufacturing tolerances at the Valencia factory, or by ‘kerbing’ of the front wheels. The result was a Fiesta XR2 too twitchy under power

Stuart McCrudden,

121

who was the man who

Loaned for a long weekend from the Ford HQ was this representative example of the 1984-85 Escort XR3i. It may look the same as ever, but it is

a vastly improved all-rounder when compared with the XR3, and a significant advance over the author’s earlier XR3i. The suspension now offers a ride that is actually better than some rivals without losing the razor-edge responses that the XR3 always exhibited on smoother roads. Equipment has been subtly updated throughout

XR’s

this

five-year life.

definitive

indoctrinated me into Ford of Boreham’s ways in 1968, lent me DJ Mike Smith’s 1984 Fiesta XR2 racer, a machine we ran for 24 laps around the Silverstone Club circuit for the May 1984 issue of Performance Car. As before in racing Fiestas, I found the car very straight-forward to drive. Even though it

consistency on Pirelli 185/55 VR slicks that denied the complete absence of any rev-counter to judge gear-change points! That underlines how competitive magazine people are to get a preview of an important new performance model these days... Although the XR Fiestas perform admirably on circuits, I think it is significant that XR Fords are not generally competition models. They are made to be affordable and practical for a wide spread of customers who use them in any role from towing to pass-storming, commuting to cuddling, all with that special XR factor!

was just out of the box with a standard engine boosted only by competition exhaust and fuel mixture, the first lap was

1min

16.1sec. This

compared to a lap record of 1min 12.4sec, and it chuffed round between 1min 14.74sec and 1min 14.40sec for the closing five laps, showing a Year 1980-81

Model Escort XR3

Extras —_C/lock; elec windows; s/roof;

Faults None

Mileage 300

Fuel consumption 27.06mpg

h/lamp wash etc Fiesta XR2 —_-Ford-assembled Rotor arm 450 24.4mpg prototype 90bhp + X-pack failure 1980 Fiesta 102bhp blueprint —__Driver! 30 — racer 1.6 Kent etc 1981-83 Escort XR3 + None See text 25,000+ 29.88mpg 1981 Fiesta XR2 Two cars None 200 off road = 1982 Fiesta XR2 = Sunroof None 50, half on track — 1982-83 Escort XR3i C/lock; elec None 500 31-35mpg windows; s/roof etc 1983 Sierra XR4i (Two cars) Oil w/light 560, USA _~ 1983-85 Escort XR3i S/roof; elec glass; Mirror fell 24,856 30.57mpg elec aerial; drive off; injection lamps; stereo recall 1983 Sierra XR4i S/roof; power steer; None 60 — central lock 17.59mpg 200bhp AVJ turbo Sticky injection 400 Sierra XR4i 1984 air flap intercooled — 24 laps/31.2m Unfinished 100bhp racer Fiesta XR2 1984 31.4mpg 1,110 Steering s/roof road; 96bhp XR2 Fiesta 1984 *Most mileages have been rounded off. The list is an extract of more interesting XRs; the writer had driven a number of other XR3s, including a very poor non-intercooled Turbo conversion that is no longer offered, as weil as the now much-improved standard XR3i, the latter borrowed from Ford HQ’s staff to check ride quality only. 1980

123

th

ij!

Appendix 1 XR Ford sales in the UK

Fiesta XR2 |'Mk 1] 1981 1982 198% 1984 Hiesta XR2 |‘Mk II’| 1984

Escort XR3i [injection| Pha) 6174 11,445 13]

1982 1983 1984

Sierra XR4i |rear drive} 1983 1984

4,649

Escort XR3 [carburettor model| 1940 19%] 1982 19%%4 1944

2,424 24,901 19,726

4,508 4,506

Source: Ford Motor Company, February 1985. 617 11,581 13,149 157 46

125

Appendix 2 Technical specifications of XR Fords Most common and valuable were the slide-and-tilt sunroof in glass; central locking and electric front windows, along with driving lamps.

Escort XR3: Produced in Germany, September 1980 to July 1982. The high-performance version of the 1980 front-drive Escort. Available only with carburated engine, initially with four-speed gearbox; for most of 1982 made with fivespeed replacement.

Escort XR3i: Produced in Britain and Germany, October 1982 onwards. The second-generation XR3 changed in many important areas including the substitution of Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection to provide another 9bhp and much better engine manners, plus civilized suspension, bigger back brakes and standard five-speed gearbox throughout.

Engine: Ford SOHC in-line four-cylinder of the CVH 1980 onward family; iron cylinder block, alloy head and beltdriven overhead camshaft. Capacity, 1,596cc; bore x stroke, 79.96mm x 79.52mm. Compression ratio, 9.5:1. Single twin-choke and downdraught carburettor, Weber DFT. Maximum power, 96bhp [DIN] at 6,000rpm. Peak torque, 98lb/ft at 4,000rpm.

Engine: Ford CVH as before but with carburation deleted in favour of Bosch K-Jetronic and new inlet and exhaust manifolding. Capacity remains at 1,596cc with 9.5:1 compression ratio. Maximum power, 105bhp [DIN] at 6,000rpm. Peak torque, 102lb/ft at 4,800rpm.

Transmission: Front-drive transaxle containing 3.84:1 final drive and 200mm/7.87in diameter single-plate clutch. Original gear ratias: first, 3.15; second, 1.91; third, 1.27; fourth, 0.95; reverse, 3.61. The 1982 five-speed simply offered an additional 0.76 fifth.

Transmission: Late-model XR3 with overdrive fifth, but transaxle final drive featured stronger version of van 4.29:1 final drive.

Suspension: Front, MacPherson struts with 22mm anti-roll bar and Bilstein monotube gas-pressurized damping. Rear, independent via transverse arms with longitudinal location links, separately mounted coil springs [progressive rate] and Bilstein telescopic shock absorbers.

Suspension: All-independent principles based on MacPherson struts and transverse arms of original Escort, but wheel angle modified to eliminate strong positive [front] and negative [rear] camber angles of XR3. Bilstein dampers deleted for Girling, still single tube and gas-filled. New spring rates, rears of linear type rather than progressive. Thicker, 24mm front anti-roll bar.

Brakes: Diagonally split twin circuits with vacuum servoassistance. Front ventilated disc, 239.5mm/9.4in diameter. Rear drums, 180mm/7in. diameter.

Brakes: As XR3 diameter drums.

Wheels and tyres: Standard alloy of 5.5in rim width x 14in diameter carrying 185/60 HR radials, normally Pirelli P6/ Goodyear NCT/Dunlop D3 factory-fitted.

at front,

but rears

now

203.2mm/8in

Wheels and tyres: Steel 6) x 14 cheaper option with nylon and glass-fibre hubcaps, otherwise exactly as before including tyre sizes for either wheel choice.

Dimensions: Length, 4,059mm/159.8in to cover spoiler and over-riders [normal Escort 3,970mm/156.3in]. Width, 62.51n/1,588mm; height, 1,336mm/52.6in; front track, 54.5in/1,385mm; rear track, 1,430mm/56.3in. Weight, 895kg/1,969|b.

Dimensions: As before, but height reduced overall by 1 inch average. Weight, 920kg/2,024lb. Basic tax-paid UK price at introduction: £6,030 wheels] and £6,155 [alloys].

Basic tax-paid UK price at introduction: £5,123.

[steel

Options: As important as previously, but with better ICE a feature.

Options: Extensive list could add over £1,000 to list price.

126

Fiesta XR2: Produced in Spain late 1981 to summer 1983.

ratios: first, 3.15; second, 1.91; third, 1.27; fourth, 0.95; fifth, 0.76. Third gear with new 1.28 ratio due for production during 1985.

The first Fiesta XR provided proven ‘Kent’ crossflow 1.6litre engine with improved braking, suspension and interior. Four-speeds only. Cars with similar specifications ste became XR2 first offered as a UK racing package in 1980.

Suspension: Principles of MacPherson-strut front, without anti-roll bar, and five-link beam rear axle with Panhard rod and Fiesta 1300 roll bar of 14mm continued. Girling Monotube gas-filled shock absorbers with 115lb/in front springs and 134lb/in rears. See Chapter 5 for critical camber/castor settings.

Engine: Ford four-cylinder in-line of the ‘Kent’ crossflow family, pushrod valve gear, iron cylinder head and block. Capacity, 1,598cc; bore x stroke, 80.98mm x 77.62mm. Compression ratio 9:1. Carburation, twin-choke DFT Weber as for first XR3. Maximum power, 84bhp [DIN] at 5,500rpm. Peak torque, 91lb/ft at 2,800rpm. Mounted 15mm lower than usual Fiesta.

Brakes: As for first XR2 with ex-Escort 239.5mm/9.4in diameter vented front discs and 177.8mm/7in rear drums. Asbestos-free Ferodo friction materials.

Wheels and tyres: Standard with steel wheels and Plus Glass reinforced hubcaps; optional alloys from first Fiesta XR2. Both wheel types 6J x 13 with 185/60 HR tyres nearly always Pirelli P6.

Transmission: Front-drive transaxle with Fiesta casing containing Escort 1.6/XR3 four-speed gearing and 1.6 saloon’s 3.58:1 final drive. Suspension: MacPherson-strut front with no anti-roll bar; tie-rods lowered 25mm and front seats for springs dropped 10mm. Revised-shock absorber settings, 1981 model year Fiesta S spring rates and 14mm rear anti-roll bar for usual Fiesta beam axle with five-link [including Panhard rod] location.

Dimensions: Length, 3,712mm/146.1in. Width, 1.620mm/ 63.8in; height at kerb weight, 1,334mm/52.5in, front track, 1,385mm/54.5in; rear track, 1,339mm/52.7in. Weight,

Brakes: Escort 8in/203.2mm vacuum servo for 1.6/XR3 239.5mm/9.4in diameter vented front discs and standard 177.8mm/7in Fiesta rear drums.

Options: Choice and prices generally lower than Escort with usual Fiesta tilt/removable glass sunroof and alloy wheels most likely UK choices.

Wheels and tyres: Alloy multi-slot 6 x 13in wheels, MAPSA or GKN-sourced, with 185/60 HR radials, usually Pirelli Po.

Sierra XR4i: Produced onwards in RHD form.

840kg/1,848lb. Basic tax-paid price in UK at introduction: £5,750.

in

Belgium

February

1983

Conceived alongside the rest of the September 1982 Sierra range, the XR4i combined 2.8-litre V6 with fuel injection and Ford five-speed gearbox within biplane-winged body of unique three-door style. Rear drive and independent rear suspension. Cd 032 claimed for modified body.

Dimensions: Length, including over-riders 3,718mm/ 146.4in. Width, 1,580mm/62.2in; height, 1,371mm/54in [unladen]; front track, 1,350mm/53.lin; rear track, 1,337mm/52.6in. Weight, 800kg/1,764lb.

Engine: Familiar Ford cast-iron 60-degree V6 has served honourably in Capri and Granada 2.81 derivatives; notably short stroke with little low-speed torque for size. Capacity, 2,792cc; bore x stroke, 93mm x 68.5mm. Compression ratio, 9.2:1, Bosch K-Jetronic fuel injection. Maximum power, 150bhp [DIN] at 5,700rpm. Peak torque, 159|b/ft at 3,800rpm.

Basic tax-paid UK price at introduction: £5,500. Options: Generally simpler than Escort, such as the lift-out rather than sliding sunroof. Possible to find a converted racer with XR2 running gear and bigger, but non-ventilated front disc brakes. Beware also the much-decorated 1300 Supersport .. .

Transmission: As used for five-speed Granada with numerically higher first, second and original four-speed fitted to Capri. Single-plate 9.5in clutch and 3.62 final drive. Gearbox ratios:

and Capris third than 241.5mm/ first, 3.358; second, 1.809; third, 1.258; fourth, 1:1; fifth, 0.825; reverse, St.

Fiesta XR2: Produced in Spain February 1984 onwards. The second-generation XR2 brought important benefits under the restyling. These included the 96bhp former XR3 engine of CVH type anda standard five-speed gearbox, also of Escort extraction although housed in a Fiesta casing. A much refined car that had pre-volume production difficulties with both front suspension tolerances and the exhaust tailpipe, the latter delaying UK launch.

Suspension: MacPherson-strut front with anti-roll bar mounted rearward [26mm/1.02in] and Bilstein strut inserts, 100.2lb/in front springs. Independent rear [not interchangeable with Granada and a lot lighter] via semitrailing arms raked at 18 degrees with separated rising-rate coil springs and telescopic gas dampers. Original press material quotes 18kg/cm-101 Ib/in rear spring ratings with a briefing subsequently quoting up to 252lb/in as the upper level reached by the progressive action. Rear anti-roll bar of 10mm/0.39in.

Engine: Ford four-cylinder in-line of the CVH family with SOHC. iron block and aluminium head. Capacity, 1,596cc; bore x stroke, 76.96 x 79.52mm. Compression ratio 9.5:1, carburation by Weber DFT. Maximum power, 96bhp [DIN] at 6,000rpm. Peak torque, 98lb/ft at 4,000rpm. Transmission: Escort 1.6 gears within Fiesta transaxle casing with Escort 1.6 saloon 3.58:1 final drive, five-speed only. Single-plate 190mm/7.48in diameter clutch. Gearbox

Brakes:

27,

Front/rear

split circuits

with

vacuum

servo-

assistance of 256mm/10.08in 254mm/10in rear drums.

ventilated

front discs and

Wheels and tyres: Standard alloys of 5.5in x 14in diameter. Steel-belted radials, 195/60 VR, usually Uniroyal or Dunlop in the UK.

Dimensions: Length, 4,458mm/175.5in. Width, 1,728mm/ 68.03in: height, 1,392mm/54.8in; front track, 1,450mm/ 57.1lin;

rear

track,

1,466mm/57.7in.

Weight,

Engine: Cast-iron 60-degree V6, as for XR4i.

Transmission: Five-speed manual gearbox with ratios as for XR4i, and similar single-dry-plate clutch and 3.62 final drive. Front differential with spiral-bevel gears in cast-alloy casing. Centre differential with epicyclic gears, 34/66 torque split front/rear, in alloy transfer box housing. Rear differential with hypoid gears and viscous coupling limitedslip mechanism.

1,205kg/

2,651lb {NB: printed figures vary from 1,175kg to the Ib equivalent ofover 1,341kg from various sources, including Ford!].

Suspension: MacPherson-strut front with 26mm anti-roll bar, gas-filled dampers and linear-rate coil springs. Independent rear with semi-trailing arms, gas-filled dampers, rising-rate coil springs and 14mm anti-roll bar.

Basic tax-paid price in UK at introduction: £9,170. Options: From October 1984, central locking, electric side glass and sunroof were taken from options list and made standard, air conditioning then becoming a new option. Power steering optional, also trip computer.

Sierra XR4x4: onwards.

Produced

in Belgium

February

1985

Ford of Europe’s first 4wd production car, with five-door body replacing three-door ‘biplane’ XR4i on UK market, but offered with three-door body on Continent, where also available with two-wheel drive. A further version, combining original XR4 three-door body with two-wheel drive, built for US market and sold there as Merkur XRTi, with 2.3-litre turbocharged engine, by Lincoln-Mercury Division.

Brakes: Ventilated front discs, 260mm/10.2in diameter and solid rear discs, 252mm/9.9in diameter. Dual circuits split front/rear with a deceleration-sensitive pressure relief valve in line to rear brakes. Vacuum servo. Wheels and tyres: RS-type seven-spoke aluminium-alloy wheels, 5.5in x 14in. Steel-belted radial tyres, 195/60 VR, usually Uniroyal, Pirelli or Dunlop.

Dimensions: Length, 4,458mm/175.5in. Width, 1,725mm/ height, 1,378mm/54.3in; wheelbase, 2,612mm/

67.9in;

102.8; front track, 1,468mm/57.8in; rear track, 1,465mm/

57.7in. Weight, 1,270kg/2,800lb. Weight 680kg/1,500lb front, 590kg/1,300lb rear.

distribution,

Basic tax-paid price in UK at introduction: £11,500.

Appendix 3 XR Ford performance Figures courtesy of AGB Specialist Publications Ltd’s monthly magazine, Performance Car. Mph (secs)

Escort XR3

Escort XR3i

Fiesta XR2*

Fiesta CVH XR2_

Sierra XR4i

_Janspeed Turbo XR4

0-30

3.56

2.78

Syl

3d

2.9

0-40

5255

4.49

_

4.4

—

3.8

0-50

UAH

6.53

=-

0-60 0-70

9.75 14.92

9.05 12.13

10.0 —

6.5 8.9

6.3 8.6

yy? 7.0

NAD

sil AL

9.4

0-80

=

16.79

_

16.6

15).,3

11.85

2.4

0-90

=

DBraiT

_

22.9

19.6

15.4

0-100

—

34.66

—

i-mile

17.0

16.9

=

35.4 16.9

25.8 16.4

19.4 15.43

113.5 Labatt

_ 102

seta 110.02 31.0

129.0 127.6 18-24

Top speed Best Average

IANS} 110

138.4 135.6 Test mpg 26.94 31.0 28.4 16-20 “Fiesta XR2 with ‘Kent’ engine was tested by Performance Car’s predecessor toa more restricted formula, bbut still il using , fifth usi a wheel. They also tried a 100bhp Ford Rally Sport conversion from Ford at Boreham with twi Sber IDE. < provided 0-30mph in 3 seconds, 0-60mph in 8.6sec and 26.37mpg overall.

Wianiiieiaimiet was

FF

ay

'

K

:

any VF x

\aNPod

eh er

4

\

aN

\ |x -

\

meat

:x 7

1

A

\ Ye3hor ' +)

'

Ori

o

,t

‘

i

as

¥ i

-

: Na

, ‘ (

ze

x

\

aes

N:

; :

;

\ ae

Other MRP books for Ford enthusiasts: In the Collector's Guide series:

The Sporting Fords Volume 1: Cortinas (Robson) 0 900549 68 8 Volume 2: Escorts (Robson) 0 900549 71 8 Volume 3: Capris (Walton) 0 900549 72 6

The Mustangs 1964-1973 (Langworth) 0 900549 81 5

Other titles: Consul, Zephyr, Zodiac: The Big Fifties Fords (Allen) 0 900549 80 7 The Ford GT40: An Anglo-American Classic (Hodges) 0 900549 91 2

Escort

Performance:

A

Practical

Competition

Guide

to

Modification and Tuning for Road and Competition (Foy) 0 900549 79 3

The Power to Win: The Desig Development and Achievements of the Ford Cosworth Engines (Blunsden) 0 900549 77 7

V8

Racing

GB

Ma MOTOR RACING PUBLICATIONS LTD MRP unit 6, 46 Pitlake, Croydon CRO 3RY

ISBN

£ NET

+010 °45

0-947981-O1-2

|

095 Sole Distributors for the USA

Motorbooks

International Publishers

Osceola, Wisconsin

& Wholesalers

54020, USA

) Inc 7

®)

9

7

"78094

7

| 981013

|