The Vauxhall Cavalier
Introduction
The mark three Vauxhall
Cavalier was a good seller, and it’s easy to see why. Vauxhall rushed the replacement Vectra through because of the brilliance of Ford’s Mondeo – but the Cavalier was a fine car. Outclassed, depending on your priorities and
needs, but a fine one nevertheless.
Engines
The Cavalier used a large
number of engines during its lifespan, ranging from a 1·4 litre petrol through
to a 2·5 litre V6, and encompassing two diesel options along the way.
The smallest petrol engine
is the 1·4, derived from the same one that powered the Nova
and Astra. Although not favoured by the
trade, or even the public, the 1·4 Cavalier is not as slow as the 15 seconds to
60 dictate - at least, not compared to the 1·6 version. Indeed, the carburettor 1·4 has 75 PS and the
carburettor 1·6 has 82 PS. On paper it
was also economical (a Combined Euromix
figure of just under 41 mpg) but on the road, the 1∙6 models is a
better bet.
Vauxhall produced three 1·6
Cavaliers. The early 1·6 Cavalier was
more or less the standard base model and in terms of output, the carburettor
1·6 has only a slight power advantage over the 1·4, but does have another 22 Nm
of torque. The carburettor 1·6 is also
economical, with a Euromix figure of just under 42 mpg. On the road the 1∙6 is “acceptable” to
drive.
Later in the Cavalier’s
life, Vauxhall introduced a revised, fuel injected and catalyst-equipped 1·6,
which had just 70 PS. Fuel economy also
dropped, but to a respectable 40 mpg.
Finally, as part of their “green drive,” Vauxhall introduced a 1·6 E-Drive Cavalier – using a revised engine and taller
gearing, this Cavalier managed a Combined Euromix figure of over 43 mpg. However, to drive, the E-Drive feels utterly gutless – more associated with
the tall gearing than anything else. But
if you wanted an efficient motorway cruiser, you could do a lot worse.
The 1·8 litre Cavalier was
an altogether much pokier prospect than the 1·6, but the fuel injected versions
lost some of the carburettor versions’ low down thump (we can blame early catalyst systems for this). Both versions muster 90 PS and 145 Nm of
torque. The 1·8 Cavalier is still
reasonably economical, with the carburettor version managing almost 38 mpg and
the fuel injected model 37 mpg.
Vauxhall used several 2.0
engines, all with fuel injection. Early
“cooking model” 2·0 engines had eight valves and produce 115 PS of power and
around 170 Nm of torque, could hit 60 in around 9 seconds, but still managed an
impressive 36 mpg (mainly due to the
engine “leaning out” at a cruise, and tall gearing). The sportier SRi Cavaliers also has eight
valves, but the engines produced 130 PS and 180 Nm. With lower gearing, acceleration was much
improved, despite the car taking 9·5 seconds to 60 (requiring third gear). Fuel
economy remains impressive, at 35 mpg. Of
the 2∙0 models I’d go for the SRi.
The Cavalier GSi used a
sixteen valve version of the 2·0 litre engine, producing 150 PS and 196 Nm of
torque, provides the Cavalier with sparkling acceleration - it hits 60 in a
quoted 7·5 seconds, and returns 33 mpg.
The Cavalier Turbo used a
turbocharged 2·0 litre engine, with 204 PS, 278 Nm, and reaches 60 mph in a
quoted 6·4 seconds. I don’t know too
much about the Turbo.
The largest petrol engine
is fitted to the Cavalier V6, of 2·5 litres in capacity. Thanks to twenty four valves, you get 170 PS
and 225 Nm, was the performance flagship in the car’s later years. On paper, it’s quick - reaching 60 mph in 7·3
seconds and on to 145 mph, as well as having reasonable fuel economy of 31 mpg. The Cavalier V6 has an altogether different
feel to the 2·0 models, being tall in the gearing and a rather lazy
approach. It’s very smooth, quiet and
refined for a Cavalier.
The Cavalier also had two
diesel options - the “atmo” 1·7 and the turbocharged 1·7 version. The “atmo” 1·7 is, to be blunt, gutless. It’s noisy and slow, but at least it is
economical, and reasonably refined.
The turbocharged 1·7 is an
altogether much better prospect. It
might not be as powerful as its main rivals, but performance and economy is
competitive, and it is reasonably refined too.
The donk, actually an Isuzu engine, has good power delivery
characteristics for the generation - an absence of turbocharger lag is the main
benefit.
Handling & Ride
If the Cavalier gets a gold
star for its wide engine range, it must lose points for not really having the
handling to match. At least, it would if
you read every road test report. Well, I
have to report that the Cavalier’s reputation for stodgy handling is reasonably
accurate. The more powerful versions
will all too easily spin their inside wheel
when tackling a sharp bend then proceed to understeer
whereas the smaller engined versions feel a bit lurchy when changing direction.
The payback is, in some
respects, in the ride. The car has a
smooth motorway ride, but it can get a bit floaty over rough surfaces at higher
speed.
The sportier models have,
in isolation, much better handling (at
the expense of a harder ride). The
best compromise that I have driven is probably the earlier SRi models, which
have a firmer ride than the ordinary 1·4, 1·6, 1·8 and 2·0 models, but have improved
handling.
Interior
I’m not really a fan of the
Cavalier’s interior - it has never really seemed all that friendly to me. However, it works well enough, it’s easy to
use, everything falls to hand reasonably well, and it’s well put together.
As far as room goes, it’s
easy to get a good driving position, and there is plenty of room in the
front. In the back, the car is adequate
if not huge. However, the boot is big,
and the Cavalier is a very versatile hatchback when required.
Most Cavaliers are well
specified, especially the models from 1994 which had ABS
as standard.
Exterior
The Cavalier is a little
bit bland and a little bit faceless - I personally don’t have a problem with
this.
Verdict
The mark three Cavalier is
not as complete a car as more modern competitors - but it is an economical
motorway cruiser, with tough engines and cheap parts. I do like the car, even if out-driven by the Mondeo.