General whats best mk1 or mk2 uno turbo

Currently reading:
General whats best mk1 or mk2 uno turbo

Alex, you're wrong mate, I've read, several times, that the Mk2's CD is 0.02 less than the Mk1's, due to the points I've indicated.

Search around, I'm sure you'll find it.
 
oh and in response, im not going to be mk2 biased as ive not driven a mk1, so hey - they're both unos and both brilliant in their own right, each has its faults - for some the slightly ott face of the mk1 may be a turnoff, and for some the beady little lights on the front of the rounder mk2 face make them think its squinting

but we all drive one or another and we all appreciate them for what they are, which is/are small, cracking little cars which, in my case, never fails to make me grin like a nutter

:D
 
For me, it has to be mk1 all the way even though I've never actually owned a turbo Uno :eek:

I have however owned two non turbo mk1's over 60K miles, and came to love the idiosyncratic design of the overall package. The dashboard has shades of old school Citroen about it (from when Citroen were cool!) and the front of the mk1 turbo looks so chunky and purposeful.

The mk1 just seems more distinctive and crisper in its style, the mk2 comes across as more diluted. The interior of the mk2 especially looks like any other super-mini of the era whereas the mk1 was uniquely Italian and Fiat. That hint of quirkiness and zany styling that only the Italians can pull off.

I never liked the look of the mk2 tailgate as it always seemed out of proportion. The slimline mk1 tailgate looks so right, and the turbo with its built in roof spoiler looks great. The mk2 turbo from what I gather never had a spoiler fitted as standard and used the same metal tailgate that all the other Uno models used. In comparison, the mk1 turbo had a unique lightweight plastic tailgate that was ONLY fitted to the turbo models.

From being in a couple of mk1 turbo's, they have a rawness that the mk2 lacks. They feel more purposeful, more distinctive and more on the edge. Overall I just prefer the oldskool charm of the mk1.

Saying that, as much as I like the styling of the mk1 turbo interior there is no doubt that unless it is very well cared for it will fall to bits (except the dashboard with plastic so hard it will probably survive a nuclear war :p ). The mk2, though much more conventional is harder wearing and made of better quality materials.

I'm going to be fitting a mk2 turbo interior to my mk1, simply because I got one cheap and it's impossible to find a complete mk1 turbo turbo interior that isn't falling apart. My dashboard is staying mk1 though, as I LOVE the mk1 dashboard. :slayer:

I'd also add that if I had the chance of buying a mk2 turbo I'd jump at it. I'd prefer a mk1, but there is no doubt that the mk2 is still a cracking car. I could well be tempted to retro convert a mk2 to a mk1 though! Mk1 front end and bonnet, tailgate and dashboard ;)

Whatever, ALL Uno turbos need to be saved whether they are mk1 or mk2...
 
I like either as both has different characters

MK2 for my project car but id happly settle for a MK1 or MK2 as a road car
 
1986Uno45S said:
I'm going to be fitting a mk2 turbo interior to my mk1, simply because I got one cheap and it's impossible to find a complete mk1 turbo turbo interior that isn't falling apart. My dashboard is staying mk1 though, as I LOVE the mk1 dashboard. :slayer:
.

mate i know of a complete ut mk1 interior including door cards and seats carpet etc etc very very good nick(y)
 
Dragyth said:
Alex, you're wrong mate, I've read, several times, that the Mk2's CD is 0.02 less than the Mk1's, due to the points I've indicated.

Search around, I'm sure you'll find it.

5doorturbo said:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiat_Uno

Gotta love wikipedia...

Mk1 Cd was 0.34, Mk 2 0.30

Apparently...

OK, sorry, I was wrong :)

Meanwhile, I found this page.
http://www.sfconline.org.uk/models/uno/uno.asp
I like it because it tidies up two things we've been talking about: out of 220,000 Unos in total, this page says 4000 were Uno Turbos (Mk1 and Mk2). And secondly, it says that while the Mk1 Cd was 0.34 (a figure that I have found elsewhere in the past), the Mk2 Cd is given as 0.33, which to me is far more believable than 0.30.

But hey, it's the Internet after all. :rolleyes:

For what it's worth, my skepticism was based on the idea that the slippery nose, by itself, would make little difference. The tuning of the rear tailgate shape probably makes more of the difference. Did you know that a Formula 1 car has a Cd in the range 0.7 to 1.1? (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_drag, if Wikipedia is indeed good enough to quote as a source!) I think we can agree that a Formula 1 car has a very slippery nose indeed! The high drag is the result of the need to create downforce.

I think I mentioned already that the front bumper of the Mk2 is taller, so although the nose appears slimmer, it actually presents a similar shape to the airflow - the top few centimetres of the bonnet are surely the only smoothing... which might be negated by the more exposed windscreen wiper on the Mk2, in the important high-pressure area at the windscreen base.

However bluff the front of the Uno, the fact remains that the rear is even more upright due to the hatchback shape - and the back is just as important as the front (if not more so due to the turbulence as the airflow layers from the roof separate and recombine) - so this is why I did not feel that a large improvement was possible, since the Uno Mk2 is still a hatchback. The Mk2 does have a slightly extended tailgate though, with a slightly less vertical window if I remember correctly.

While the 0.30 still seems a tall order, 0.02 is not such a huge difference (i.e. 0.34 - 0.32) so I'm happy to accept that you're right, Dragyth, and I was wrong to think there'd be no difference :)

Thanks,
-Alex
 
alexGS said:
However bluff the front of the Uno, the fact remains that the rear is even more upright due to the hatchback shape - and the back is just as important as the front (if not more so due to the turbulence as the airflow layers from the roof separate and recombine)

-Alex

You're right Alex, the back is more important than the front. A bluff rear end will always cause a vacuum effect and reduce aerodynamics. Has anyone seen how on some new cars the leading edge of the rear lights have ridges moulded in? It's all for the aerodynamics. A-pillars, mirrors and the flloorpan are also critical. Essentially Fiat has managed to improve the figures through the angle of the front end, smaller grille, front bumper and the tailgate. However considering the MkII is around 10% heavier the MkI will always be more efficient........................M.
 
MK"2 for me all the way, i'd like to see some proof the mk2 is 10% heavier, i know there held together better, lets post pics of the pro's and cons of both mk1 and mk2, mk1 i like the red carpet and better seats and rust proof tailgate, dont like the fragility, breeze block front end, co efficient he he, rear end look and the old 80's video type knobs so close to the steering wheel, and the wiring, but they are the first and the original but the mk2 is an EVOLUTION!
 
1986Uno45S said:
:cry: :cry: :cry:

I already have a mk2 interior :bang:

But the good thing is that it only cost me £20, and that was with EVERYTHING else I wanted to take from the car. Bargain!
:yeahthat: well said bargin
 
alexGS said:
For what it's worth, my skepticism was based on the idea that the slippery nose, by itself, would make little difference. The tuning of the rear tailgate shape probably makes more of the difference. Did you know that a Formula 1 car has a Cd in the range 0.7 to 1.1? (source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_drag, if Wikipedia is indeed good enough to quote as a source!) I think we can agree that a Formula 1 car has a very slippery nose indeed! The high drag is the result of the need to create downforce.

must be akin to driving a needle...the teams do spend $$zillions$$ on making sure their top of the game though...

0.7-1.1 though :eek:
 
Ne, I've heard it's .32. But you're right, it's a bit unbelievable that there's that much difference.

That's the kind of difference you see when you lower the roofline by an inch and a half. Shape difference is nowhere near as drastic, although the Mk1s tailgate is fairly streamlined.

I'd vouch for it being equally as important to the drag coefficient as the headlamps and as the bumper. Or thereabouts, anyway.
 
pics of mk2 rear end with prima sport spoiler off ebay £30 to my door, quick rub, then white, and on easy, any one else who gets one and would like some tips no probs, as all the instructions were italian and not very good show me a pic off your mk1's antsuno 021.jpg

antsuno 023.jpg
 
antsuno2 said:
thanks mate i luv your mk1 more pics than anyone else, zoom in and you'l see my wifes name on the no plate boo! hoo!

Thanks mate im just doing a bit each day, it passed mot but no tax cus im still restoring it its just i didnt want the history to miss a mot out, respray is next and some de-locking (y) spoiler looks sweet on the mk2 good work... :D
 
mine missed 5 mots,, tlc took time, want it to last ,everyone used to look at the 127 1300 gt and say what the fooks that it is the same with the uno non round here for 5 years in the whole of manchester,
 
I aint seen any round near me, till dragyth appeared on here and only lives 10 miles away, his needs some welding thou which im doing for him, in return he gave me a scorpion exhaust,strut brace and bleed valve, so were both happy:) .
Thing is now theres 2 near me, mine and his but thats it, rare as hen's teeth i say mk1's are drying up now and mk2's will follow shortly :cry:
 
Back
Top