General Mk I or MK II?

[friend of stouby]

Is there a majority in favour of early or later cars, or are you split on this?

Is it the case of early cars are more attractive and later a little too ???, or are the MK II improvements so good that they are worth having?

Thanks

 

[wish mine was orange]

i am bias on this mk1 lol both are nice depends if you like styling of the mk2 realy and mk1 has a little more power.
other than that both great car oh one will cost you more

 

[bumble]

i am bias on this mk1 lol both are nice depends if you like styling of the mk2 realy and mk1 has a little more power.
other than that both great car oh one will cost you more

Unless it's orange! Then they will probably pay you to take it away!

 

[wish mine was orange]

lol i wish i would even have a mk2 if it was orange

 

[F4usT]

i think mk1 is a bit more quality than mk2.... i say mk1 with mk2 bumpers.

 

[afroking]

I'd say Mk 1, its has more original features which fit in with the rest of the delicat styling. Mk 2 in my opinion looks as though no thought went into the styling, instead trying to resemble something of an MX-5.

Looking at the quality of the fit and finish, I would say pre 2000 cars are of the best quality.

 

[desert rat]

i think mk1 is a bit more quality than mk2.... i say mk1 with mk2 bumpers.

I've not actually seen another 1 on the island but I like the Mk2 front bumper... makes the car look a bit more agressive...:yum:

But that funny 3rd brake light....:yuck:

I guess in the UK a Mk II would have less mileage and less rust than a MK I.

I guess it depends on your budget.... How about a MK II with a MK I boot lid?

 

[johnv]

I think I have a Mark 1.5 .. it has (had) the 3rd brakelight, but small bumpers. I've just replaced the bootlid with a proper one.

 

[F4usT]

hm.... nose is missing.

 

[wish mine was orange]

f4ust i like it lol
desert rat my 95 mk1 only had tiny rust around wheel arches not bad for the uk weather