RE: Six Of The Best? Forgotten Hot Hatches
Discussion
http://www.civictyper.org/ek9civic.html
The EK9 - want! want! want! (in the above Championship White, naturally). A genuine HOT hatch.
Who remembers Performace Car's quote? Something along the lines of:-
"0 to 60 not in 9. Not 8. Not 7. Not 6. But 5.7. Five point seven!"
Edited by joz8968 on Friday 14th October 19:07
Hub said:
soxboy said:
thewheelman said:
Ramses said:
j_s14a said:
along with its stablemate ZX Volcane TD, the original hot Deisel.
80s Golf GTD and the 306 TurboD..... 
Not quicker than the XSI though - 90BHP vs somewhere between 120-130BHP in the Phase 1 306 IIRC
Although the DTurbo had less bhp, it was the in-gear times when it was on boost that made it in the same ball park as the XSi despite the power deficit.
The DT also had a much lower insurance group than the XSi
joz8968 said:
http://www.civictyper.org/ek9civic.html
The EK9 - want! want! want! (in the above Championship White, naturally). A genuine HOT hatch.
Who remembers Performace Car's quote? Something along the lines of:-
"0 to 60 not in 9. Not 8. Not 7. Not 6. But 5.7. Five point seven!"
Edited by joz8968 on Friday 14th October 19:07
minimatt1967 said:
joz8968 said:
306 S16. The forerunner to the aforementioned XSi.
IIRC, I think it had a 155bhp 8v version of the GTI-6's 167bhp 16v 2.0.
No, no 8v, it had the 16v iron block engine out of the later 405 Mi16.IIRC, I think it had a 155bhp 8v version of the GTI-6's 167bhp 16v 2.0.
Edited by joz8968 on Friday 14th October 17:18
1987 - 1.9 16v 160bhp all alloy - BX 16v, 309 GTi 16 (LHD only) and 405 Mi16 ph1.
1992 - 2.0 16v 150-155bhp iron block - ZX 16v, early Xantia VSX 16v, 306 S16, 405 Mi16 ph2
1996 - 2.0 16v 167bhp iron block - Xsara VTS, ZX 16v Dakar (LHD only) and 306 GTi-6.
The 306 you're thinking of was probably the 130bhp 2.0 8v XSi.
soad said:
I'm yet to see a Beetle RSi on the road.
..........Thank god thats just a whole bucket of wrongmissing the VR6 said:
Interesting concept for a feature, would have been nice to get a bit more info on how they drive compared to say a more modern hatch or their contemporaies at the time.
...............They are modernWith the exception of the BX they are all a bit boring, lardy, slow and new, where are the true oldie hot hatches.
MG Maestro (with or without Turbo)
Honda CRX
Strada Arbarth
Uno Turbo
Ren 5 Turbo
Citroen ZX Volcane
Ren 19
Charade Gtti (wasn't that the first 100hp per litre car)?
Edited by sparkyhx on Friday 14th October 22:40
Edited by sparkyhx on Friday 14th October 22:44
minimatt1967 said:
Kitchski said:
1987 - 1.9 16v 160bhp all alloy - 309 GTi 16 (LHD only)
That there is one of the tragedies of the late 80's early 90's. That would have knocked seven shades of s
t out of the Golf GTI 16v and Astra GSi. Very much want. Because it would have involved modifying to that level, none of the approval ratings that already exsisted on the 309 (or Talbot Arizona as it was originally to be) would have been valid and that model would have to be resubmitted at huge cost. It didn't seem worth it, being that they knew they wouldn't sell many anyway A real shame, as a 309 GTi 16 has to be one of the best true hot hatches ever made. I can't think of a better setup in that sector of car and as an all-rounder I don't think the 306 GTi-6/Xsara VTS would have been any better. Just newer.
Kitchski said:
Agreed. They never brought it over here because they wouldn't have been able to fit the brake master cylinder and servo in with that engine on the offside, as per the right hand drive cars. They'd either have had to modify, adapt or even relocate it to the nearside and operate it by remote linkage as with the Citroen AX/Peugeot 106 platform.
Because it would have involved modifying to that level, none of the approval ratings that already exsisted on the 309 (or Talbot Arizona as it was originally to be) would have been valid and that model would have to be resubmitted at huge cost. It didn't seem worth it, being that they knew they wouldn't sell many anyway A real shame, as a 309 GTi 16 has to be one of the best true hot hatches ever made. I can't think of a better setup in that sector of car and as an all-rounder I don't think the 306 GTi-6/Xsara VTS would have been any better. Just newer.
I always wondered why they never entered the hyper hatch race, thanks. The Goodwood with an Mi would have just been utter perfection. Well one some T/B's and a Quaife were installed anyway Because it would have involved modifying to that level, none of the approval ratings that already exsisted on the 309 (or Talbot Arizona as it was originally to be) would have been valid and that model would have to be resubmitted at huge cost. It didn't seem worth it, being that they knew they wouldn't sell many anyway A real shame, as a 309 GTi 16 has to be one of the best true hot hatches ever made. I can't think of a better setup in that sector of car and as an all-rounder I don't think the 306 GTi-6/Xsara VTS would have been any better. Just newer.
If they really wanted to get in on the hyper hatch race they could have bashed it in the 205 too.
I reckon there are two main reasons why they didn't. Insurance was already high in the UK (not sure about europe) on the 205 GTi, so adding another 35bhp might not have helped. And secondly, it's rumoured that PSA lost money on every single XU9J4 made, because it used complex casting methods and expensive materials, such as Magnesium for the cam cover. I believe theres a bit of titanium in there too, somewhere. If they'd bolted it into the 205, the BX and 405 would have lost their (already fairly limited) appeal and they'd have sold lots more engine units, which would have cost more and possibly even devalued the engine name to an extent; the engine in the 205 GTi was nothing special at all, just a run of the mill 1.9 8v unit as found in other PSA cars (all be it with fuel injection added on). But lightweight works
I think people wouldn't have been ready for a 160bhp small hatch they tipped the scales at under 900kg back in 1986!
I reckon there are two main reasons why they didn't. Insurance was already high in the UK (not sure about europe) on the 205 GTi, so adding another 35bhp might not have helped. And secondly, it's rumoured that PSA lost money on every single XU9J4 made, because it used complex casting methods and expensive materials, such as Magnesium for the cam cover. I believe theres a bit of titanium in there too, somewhere. If they'd bolted it into the 205, the BX and 405 would have lost their (already fairly limited) appeal and they'd have sold lots more engine units, which would have cost more and possibly even devalued the engine name to an extent; the engine in the 205 GTi was nothing special at all, just a run of the mill 1.9 8v unit as found in other PSA cars (all be it with fuel injection added on). But lightweight works
I think people wouldn't have been ready for a 160bhp small hatch they tipped the scales at under 900kg back in 1986!
I had a BX16v in black G reg,absolutely loved it,went like stink and even managed to hang on around the corners and best of all would really surprise alot of other seemingly faster cars..............then the cam belt broke 
bent alot of valves but was an easy rebuild but expensive,had a a few problems with the clutch and the suspension seemed to have a mind of its own, all in all a great machine, a real wolf in sheeps clothing 
bent alot of valves but was an easy rebuild but expensive,had a a few problems with the clutch and the suspension seemed to have a mind of its own, all in all a great machine, a real wolf in sheeps clothing Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff