LOL. The car was designed for 1 bar, and Fiat detuned it, nonsense, nothing more than urban myth. All cars are designed to have an element of safety margin, and are tested for long term durability, therefore the car was not designed for 1bar, but 0.5bar. That's as daft as saying the R5GTT was designed for 1500bhp (qualifying only so 3 laps) as the engine block was essentially the same as used in F1 running 1100bhp race trim max 5bar boost adjustable in cockpit, and for the rally cars which ran 350bhp, look it up same basic overhead valve engine was used in all which in itself was designed in the 50's.
Damn, I have read (that sounds weak I know...) in a number of sources that the road going UT engine was originally planned to produce more power than the final production version. As much as I like the Uno Turbo there is no denying, and this is what many road tests of the time also stated, that the handling was not on par with many of its rivals. It wasn't bad like an understeering deathtrap that was the Morris Marina TC, but it was not up to the standard of a R5 GTT, Pug 205 GTi or even a Golf GTi. Adding extra power is not a good idea when the chassis is somewhat mediocre in the first place.
My argument is weak as I cannot show any sources of this information and maybe it is urban myth until I can prove otherwise. However, the biggest factor in the detuning 'myth' was the fact that the Uno Turbo with higher boost would then have straight line performace that would embarass the bigger and more expensive flagship of Fiat's range - the Strada Abarth 130TC. That would leave Fiat in an awkward position of trying to sell a more expensive performance model that actually performed worse than a cheaper and smaller equivilent.
This is the same as why Ford never offered the mk2 XR2 Fiesta with fuel injection, as being lighter it would have outperformed the bigger and more expensive XR3i. So the XR2 was only available with a carburettor to make it's performance less than the XR3i.
Where has Fiat themselves ever written we designed an engine stuck it in a car that couldn't cope with the power so we detuned it so as to not have to face the litigation that we faced when the brakes and chassis couldn't cope. All components are designed for the overall brief of the car, if the engine was detuned, the chassis and brakes would have been better for the expected extra power and therefore speed the car would have had.
I doubt Fiat ever would make such a public statement as it's not in their best interest to do so. Comments about this issue filtered down from reports and tests and yes, some could be hearsay or myth making. But remember that the standard UT was not renowned for either its brakes or handling and many road tests criticised its road manners. This was with 105bhp, imagine what it would be like with 150bhp
So I believe that the Unos handling was partly a factor in the engine being detuned, but primarily it was so that the Strada 130TC remained as the flagship perfomance model.
Quite how Fiat never managed to achieve the chassis dynamics of the 205 GTi or R5GTT with the Uno who can tell. It is generally regarded by those with UT's that the suspension and brakes are the weakest points of the car, though both can be upgraded fairly easily. Maybe Fiat compromised too much with the standard car trying to make it cater for all markets?
The extended periods I referred to for the turbo Cinq was months at higher boost, as the owners didn't realise it was running so high as gauge was in PSi. As for mine, did it fail on me, no, did I run lots of boost, yes, did I have any qualms about driving it to Glasgow from Bournemouth when I lived there, some 475miles, no, or for getting me to work everyday, no, because it would be kind of embarrassing to say to a pilot, sorry you can't land the controller's car has broken down again
Aaron, my comment was somewhat tongue in cheek and I do acknowledge that the demise of the Imola Blue engine was as much to do with the way it was probably driven by its new owner as it was to do with it being a turbo conversion.
You are extremely knowledgeable and I have a lot of respect for the work you have done with your Cinq's and Sei's. However, there is no getting away from the fact that many turbo converted Cinq's have been troublesome, though as I mentioned in my original post a lot is probably down to how well the turbo conversion was (or was not) carried out. On the other hand, many standard Uno turbos have run more than happily to mileages well over 100K needing little work, some touching 150K before major engine work was needed. But UT's are all old cars now and many have been both thrashed and neglected for too many years. To be honest buying a Uno Turbo today without a full history and meticulous servicing is likely to lead to a lot of trouble and heartache, that I am not blind to.
I drove UT's MK1 and 2 when they were no more than 2/3 years old with intention of buying as always liked the way they looked, but they were poor in comparison with the competition, hence why they do not command as much money now as there period rivals, even though because they sold in smaller numbers back then, are now rarer and therefore you would think the reverse would be true, but as with anything nothing is worth more than someone is willing to pay.
Again, I agree. What let the UT's down was the handling and brakes and the general driving dynamics. They can be improved upon but I have no delusions that they would then be able to compete with the French rivals of the time. Wind up the boost and it might take them in a straight line, but throw in a few corners and the UT's shortcomings will become apparent.
As for prices, UT values have been steadily climbing over the past few years. Back in 2003 when I started looking for Unos on Ebay a rough UT could be had for £200 and a complete parts car could be had for £100. Now rough cars are going for over £500 and a very clean example can fetch somewhere between £1000 - £1500.
You are right though, there are very few UT's sold compared with Pugs and Renaults:
http://search-completed.ebay.co.uk/...ftrt=1&ftrv=1&saprclo=&saprchi=&fsop=3&fsoo=2
Even a search for current auctions only brings up this:
http://search.ebay.co.uk/search/sea...ftrt=1&ftrv=1&saprclo=&saprchi=&fsop=3&fsoo=2
Renault 5 GTT's go for similar amounts to UT's, though more top condition models do seem to go higher at £2000+:
http://search-completed.ebay.co.uk/...QsaobfmtsZinsifQQsaprchiZQQsaprcloZQQsbrsrtZd
Peugeut 205 GTi models go for less, most are well under £1000:
http://search-completed.ebay.co.uk/...QsaobfmtsZinsifQQsaprchiZQQsaprcloZQQsbrsrtZd
Saying all that though, what price can you put on any of them? It's only worth what someone is prepared to pay and with cars like these you buy with your heart more than with your head. Some of it might be down to the model's reputation, some might be memories you have of when the car was new and some might simply because you always wanted one. All these old hot hatches are becoming rare now, and that alone makes them all the more special. You not only will be driving a performance hatchback with these but also a little piece of motoring history. For that they all deserve to be preserved and respected.
Though as with all cars what you like about them is subjective in how they make you feel when you drive them, otherwise we would all drive the same car.
Absolutely. I like both and have owned many Unos and also a Cinq. I have respect for both cars and wouldn't hesitate to buy either again (though I think I'd go for the Cinq Sporting with the FIRE engine rather than the 899cc Soleil next time). I also greatly respect the design of the FIRE engine and believe it to be a far more efficient design to that of the UT's 1299/ 1301cc ohc Lampredi engine. I've now travelled 70K miles total in two 999cc FIRE engined Unos and can attest to their strength and reliability, and with a
proper turbo conversion (I still regard head spacers as a bodge though) there is no reason why a Cinq turbo can't be as reliable as a UT.
But I think a Cinq turbo due to the fact that it is a conversion is never going to be as bullet proof as a factory produced turbo engine. There is too much leeway for corners to be cut and hamfisted bodges to become involved leading to an unreliable engine and a money pit. Then again, I agree that a UT due to the fact that it an old car is just as likely to be problematic and a money pit as well.
That's why I concluded that I would buy a Cinq with a 16v conversion rather than a turbo conversion. Partly because the 16v engine is known to be reliable and also because of seeing Emma's 1.4 16v (at Brooklands) looking like it had come out of the factory built that way. Plus as your recent rolling road experience showed, the 16v conversion ended up being more powerful in terms of outright power than the two turbo conversions that were also rolling roaded.
I say Alex buy what you want, don't regret it, just enjoy it and add it to your own personal driving experiences.
Yup, and that's why I suggested Alex should try out a UT before making a decision. I found even the basic Cinqs and Unos very different to drive, and as Alex is more used to Cinqs he might find the UT too different and not to his taste. Me, I like both but seeing as part of me is firmly a fan of retro cars the Uno suits me more being the older car. In another five years or so there probably won't be any Unos left so I will be more than happy to turn to Cinqs instead as they will then take on the baton of 'retro car'.
