FOR SALE: BX Pilot 1.5

Buy or sell parts etc. Please put 'Wanted' in the title if it is a request for parts.
Post Reply
CarolynN8
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:06 pm

FOR SALE: BX Pilot 1.5

Post by CarolynN8 »

Hi,
I came across this site today and was so pleased to find people that really care about these lovely cars. The situation is this – I have had my BX Pilot for 19 years, from new. I don’t use it a lot and it still only has 42000 miles on the clock. However, there have been various problems with the suspension system over the last couple of years and I’m just taking a £600 hit to get it through its MOT this year. I’ve decided to bite the bullet and find a new car, but I’d hate to scrap this one so I wondered if any of you would like to make an offer for it? I’ll get a photo done when it comes out of the garage in a few days, but the basic details are as follows:

BX Pilot 1.5 Venetian Red 5 door hatchback with Mistral Velour upholstery, sport seats at front, black bumpers; black dashboard; power steering; central locking, electric sunroof and electric front windows; original stereo radio/cassette.
First registered July 1989 and owned by me since then.
Mileage: 42159

Complete service history available including MOT certificates. No major issues until 2005 when front flexi hoses perished, 2007 when suspension seals and connectors went, 2008 HT leads, more suspension hoses perished, 2009 front spheres to be replaced and nine hydraulic pipes for brakes and suspension. Once these latest problems are fixed it will have 1 year MOT and 1 year tax from 30th June.

Condition: bodywork not bad for its age, original Pilot body grahics; bit scruffy but no rust anywhere, even underneath! Small dent in offside back door. All four wheel trims are missing and wheels rather rusty. The velour upholstery is faded at front but not marked or dirty. Back nearside door locks needs to be pushed down by hand. One new tyre in 2005.

I’ve enjoyed the car very much all these years and hope one of you would like to take it on now. I’ll post a photo as soon as possible. Oh, and the car’s located in North London.

Hope to hear back from someone.
Carolyn
scarecrow

Post by scarecrow »

Hi carolyn

I'm interested - more information though please!

Steve
User avatar
Tim Leech
Over 2k
Posts: 15565
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:12 am
Location: Derbyshire
My Cars: Various
x 141

Post by Tim Leech »

Wow a 1.6 Pilot, I forgot all about those, for anyone interested the Pilot was a 16RS available in either white or red, with GTi wheel trims, black interior and sports seats (same as a GTi) and special graphics. They also had power steering too. Made for one year I think 88-89 so most are on a F plate.

Getting very rare now, lets hope this one gets saved!
Lots of Motors, mostly semi broken....
CarolynN8
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:06 pm

Post by CarolynN8 »

scarecrow wrote:Hi carolyn

I'm interested - more information though please!

Steve

Hi Steve, Reply on its way, but in the meantime here is scan picture from the original sales brochure:

http://i676.photobucket.com/albums/vv12 ... N8/car.jpg

The car looks pretty like this now, although as I said the wheel trims are missing and the paintwork is not so bright. It's in the garage for a few days waiting for parts at the moment.
Carolyn
Kitch
Over 2k
Posts: 6417
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:36 pm
Location: Fareham, Hants
My Cars: Too many to list
x 88
Contact:

Post by Kitch »

Is it actually a 1.5? I know Pilots were 1.6's, but I know of a couple of imports in the UK that are genuine 1.5 cars, built to dodge a tax hike in europe or something. Probably not Pilot models though, think that was UK only. Guessing it's just a de-stroked XU5.
CarolynN8
New Member
Posts: 7
Joined: Wed Jun 10, 2009 12:06 pm

1.5 or 1.6?

Post by CarolynN8 »

Hi guys, it says 1580cc on the documentation, and 1.5 on the back of the car.

It's still in the garage going through its MOT. Just as soon as I get it back I will post some pictures.
Carolyn
scarecrow

Post by scarecrow »

Kitch wrote:Is it actually a 1.5? I know Pilots were 1.6's, but I know of a couple of imports in the UK that are genuine 1.5 cars, built to dodge a tax hike in europe or something. Probably not Pilot models though, think that was UK only. Guessing it's just a de-stroked XU5.
Hi Kitch

Please could you explain "de-stroked" to me? I read somewhere that the 1.5 produced a bit less power but gave better fuel consumption. There's no Pilot 1.5 on the Footman James & Co Ltd quote system though - but then there are no 1.5's at all.

Thanks
Kitch
Over 2k
Posts: 6417
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:36 pm
Location: Fareham, Hants
My Cars: Too many to list
x 88
Contact:

Re: 1.5 or 1.6?

Post by Kitch »

CarolynN8 wrote:Hi guys, it says 1580cc on the documentation, and 1.5 on the back of the car.

It's still in the garage going through its MOT. Just as soon as I get it back I will post some pictures.
1580cc is a 1.6. If it says 1.5 on the back it's definately had a badge stuck on for some reason, as the 1.5 and 1.6 models are either badged "15" or "16" respectively.

Sounds like a standard 16 Pilot to me. If it was anything else it'd be something odd!
Kitch
Over 2k
Posts: 6417
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:36 pm
Location: Fareham, Hants
My Cars: Too many to list
x 88
Contact:

Post by Kitch »

scarecrow wrote:
Kitch wrote:Is it actually a 1.5? I know Pilots were 1.6's, but I know of a couple of imports in the UK that are genuine 1.5 cars, built to dodge a tax hike in europe or something. Probably not Pilot models though, think that was UK only. Guessing it's just a de-stroked XU5.
Hi Kitch

Please could you explain "de-stroked" to me? I read somewhere that the 1.5 produced a bit less power but gave better fuel consumption. There's no Pilot 1.5 on the Footman James & Co Ltd quote system though - but then there are no 1.5's at all.

Thanks
There are two measures used to calculate an engines cubic capacity.....bore and stroke.

Bore is the diameter of the piston barrel, or cylinder. The bigger the bore, the larger the horizontal capacity of the cylinder and therefore the more air/fuel you can squeeze in, in theory giving you more power.

Stroke is the distance the top of the piston travels as it moves up and down during the compression cycle. The longer the stroke, the more air and fuel once more can be squeezed in. This will also give more power, although I'm led to believe that the lower revving torquey engines have a long stroke and a smaller bore, and visa versa for a high revving petrol engine, though how true that is I'm not sure.

If the bore on an engine measured 75mm and the stroke also measured 75mm, it's known as a 'square' engine.
If it's got a 75mm bore and 85mm stroke, it's (I think, but could be wrong way around) it's an under-square engine.
If it's 85mm x 75mm it's an over-square lump (again, I could be mixed up there!)

By taking a 1580cc engine and then fitting longer con-rods or deeper pistons, the stroke is reduced. This would make the engine more revvy but ultimately less powerful/torquey. When capacities of all four cylinders are measured, the resulting cc range would be 1450cc - 1549cc for a 1.5 engine. As I say, I think they did it for tax reasons in some nation somehwere. Think the model I saw was a 15RE.
scarecrow

Post by scarecrow »

Hi Kitch

I don't know a huge amount about this but, I understood the 1.5 to have the same capacity as the 1.6 but the power o/p was restricted somehow - no doubt for the tax reasons you mention?

Could this be feasible?
Kitch
Over 2k
Posts: 6417
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:36 pm
Location: Fareham, Hants
My Cars: Too many to list
x 88
Contact:

Post by Kitch »

All engines were badged as 11, 14, 16, 19 — signifying engine size (In some countries, a weaker, 80Bhp version of the 1.6 L engine was badged as the BX15E instead of BX16). The 11TE model was seen by foreign motoring press as slow and uncomfortable.
Just found the above on Wikipedia. This goes against what I read before about the de-stroked engine, but I can't find the article for the life of me!
Either way one is wrong, and it's possible the 15 isn't a 1.5 afterall!

Anyway.....back to the for sale thread! :D
Kitch
Over 2k
Posts: 6417
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:36 pm
Location: Fareham, Hants
My Cars: Too many to list
x 88
Contact:

Post by Kitch »

scarecrow wrote:Hi Kitch

I don't know a huge amount about this but, I understood the 1.5 to have the same capacity as the 1.6 but the power o/p was restricted somehow - no doubt for the tax reasons you mention?

Could this be feasible?
You replied just as I added on the bottom :lol:
scarecrow

Post by scarecrow »

That's probably the same thing as I read - I'm not sure about how far to trust Wikipedia though!!

Thanks for the stroke description. I'm trying to get my head around why fatter bores should give more torque than skinnier ones. It makes sense intuitively...

Cheers
Kitch
Over 2k
Posts: 6417
Joined: Sun Jul 03, 2005 9:36 pm
Location: Fareham, Hants
My Cars: Too many to list
x 88
Contact:

Post by Kitch »

I'd say it's the other way around, a longer stroke engine would rev as eagerly, but with each compression cycle comes alot of piston travel from one cycle. It's like riding a bike with really short pedal cranks and trying to get up hill, or one with 1ft long cranks. It'd be easier to get torque down with the later, but the former would be ultimately faste using less leg effort once on the move.
That's just how I'd imagine I anyway!

That said, just found stats for my TVR which has a lazy but grunty engine, and it's bore/stroke is 94 x 82mm, so that kinda puts my theory into the ditch. But then it's only a 4.0, which for a V8 isn't all that big. If it were a six litre with the same number of pistons, the bores would be bigger, but the stroke wouldn't differ much.

Anyway, engine threads always get me off on a geeky turn. Last time from me, back to OP topic!! :lol:
User avatar
mat_fenwick
Moderator
Posts: 7326
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:08 pm
Location: North Wales
x 19

Post by mat_fenwick »

Kitch wrote:engine threads always get me off on a geeky turn.
Sorry, but me too! :oops: You're right Kitch, longer stroke engines are (generally) more torquey as they have more leverage (as you say) but tend to be less revvy, as for a given rpm the pistons have to travel faster, and change direction more quickly.

Now shall we get back OT? At least it's bringing more people to look at the thread, which can only be a good thing when selling a car!
Image

1993 1.9 TZD Turbo Estate
1996 3.9 V8 Discovery
1993 VW LT35 campervan
1985 Hyundai Stellar V8
2016 Hyundai iLoad
Post Reply