Peugeot 406 Coupe v Peugeot 206 GTi v Mondeo v Mazda6
Discussion
I think I have narrowed down my DD choice to one of these. All can be had for under £1k, all on paper do over 40mpg (No V6's, no diseasal's and no auto's) except the 2.3 in the Mazda6, though I'd likely go for the 2.0.
I do around 1200-1500 miles a month, mainly motorway with a little bit of town driving.
They're all similar size except the 206, and the only reason I've included it is because it could give me a little cheap fun.
Any thoughts? I know people have said Accord's and the like, but they on paper do not seem to meet what I need from a DD.
Cheers.
I do around 1200-1500 miles a month, mainly motorway with a little bit of town driving.
They're all similar size except the 206, and the only reason I've included it is because it could give me a little cheap fun.
Any thoughts? I know people have said Accord's and the like, but they on paper do not seem to meet what I need from a DD.
Cheers.
206 would grate on you on the motorway. 406's are nice to look at but probably not as technically advanced as the Mazda or the Ford. My money would go on the Mondeo but then I'm biased as I own one. Try and find a 2.0 Ghia X for cruise, climate, leather, trip computer, and ideally one with the rear subframe bushes done, and a recent clutch.
I'd stay away from the Mazda. They're pretty much the same as the Mondeo, but with a fatal issue. The rustproofing didn't work. A Mondeo of that age may have a bit, but Mazda 6s tend to actually rot away. Which is not a good thing.
Of the others I haven't driven a 206 GTi, but I'd guess for £1,000 you won't be getting the best one. I've driven other variants but you're probs doing too many miles to make a small car fun.
Which leaves Mondeo vs 406. 406 is much better looking, but you've mentioned a desire for the weakest engine. Mondeo 2.0 litre is meh but fast enough if needs be. It's a sort of slightly disappointing engine: there's lots of noise and expectation but no underlying good characteristics. Akin to Peter Andre's plastic pectorals: looks good but doesn't really work. Or in the car's case it sounds good; you know like a racy four cylinder should. But there's little associated speed. The V6 is like that but more so. Granted it's a little faster but not loads. It sounds epic though.
I appreciate this doesn't help very much but I'd pick the Mondeo for image. If you care about that kind of thing (I do) the 406 coupe is very much in the woods. It's got the whiff of 'loser coupe' about it. You know.... The man who drives a cheap old two door because he doesn't have sufficient friends/family to justify having a big car. In his head it's a bra-snapping, pheromone belching sex machine. In reality it's a clapped out banger trying too hard. Generally seen parked outside the entrance of the only nightclub in town playing Earth, Wind and Fire; possibly even whilst the owner lounges on it to show off his fraying leather jacket.
This happens to all coupes. One day it will be cool again; witness Capri, Manta, Fox Mustang, Camaro, Jaguar XJS et al.
Of the others I haven't driven a 206 GTi, but I'd guess for £1,000 you won't be getting the best one. I've driven other variants but you're probs doing too many miles to make a small car fun.
Which leaves Mondeo vs 406. 406 is much better looking, but you've mentioned a desire for the weakest engine. Mondeo 2.0 litre is meh but fast enough if needs be. It's a sort of slightly disappointing engine: there's lots of noise and expectation but no underlying good characteristics. Akin to Peter Andre's plastic pectorals: looks good but doesn't really work. Or in the car's case it sounds good; you know like a racy four cylinder should. But there's little associated speed. The V6 is like that but more so. Granted it's a little faster but not loads. It sounds epic though.
I appreciate this doesn't help very much but I'd pick the Mondeo for image. If you care about that kind of thing (I do) the 406 coupe is very much in the woods. It's got the whiff of 'loser coupe' about it. You know.... The man who drives a cheap old two door because he doesn't have sufficient friends/family to justify having a big car. In his head it's a bra-snapping, pheromone belching sex machine. In reality it's a clapped out banger trying too hard. Generally seen parked outside the entrance of the only nightclub in town playing Earth, Wind and Fire; possibly even whilst the owner lounges on it to show off his fraying leather jacket.
This happens to all coupes. One day it will be cool again; witness Capri, Manta, Fox Mustang, Camaro, Jaguar XJS et al.
Edited by MagneticMeerkat on Sunday 14th September 20:57
shake n bake said:
I had the 2.0 406 coupe a few years ago, it was a nice car to drive, not agile and used to fry the brakes under a bit of a spirited drive but not bad.
I must say if your doing 1500 miles a month your bonkers buying a 2.0 petrol.
Why? I am currently doing it in a 5.0 V8, so a 2.0 4 cyl should save me some money. I dont want diseasal.I must say if your doing 1500 miles a month your bonkers buying a 2.0 petrol.
nipsips said:
206 would grate on you on the motorway. 406's are nice to look at but probably not as technically advanced as the Mazda or the Ford. My money would go on the Mondeo but then I'm biased as I own one. Try and find a 2.0 Ghia X for cruise, climate, leather, trip computer, and ideally one with the rear subframe bushes done, and a recent clutch.
That was the only thing I thought with the 206, small car with less cosseting might annoy me. I would certainly want a Ghia X if going down the Mondeo route, I like my toys!Rovinghawk said:
I've used a mondeo as a motorway hack & would recommend one. Very comfortable & easy to work on.
Bland, though.
Cheers! Bland doesnt bother me, I've got an M5 for my sBland, though.
ts and giggles.MagneticMeerkat said:
I'd stay away from the Mazda. They're pretty much the same as the Mondeo, but with a fatal issue. The rustproofing didn't work. A Mondeo of that age may have a bit, but Mazda 6s tend to actually rot away. Which is not a good thing.
Of the others I haven't driven a 206 GTi, but I'd guess for £1,000 you won't be getting the best one. I've driven other variants but you're probs doing too many miles to make a small car fun.
Which leaves Mondeo vs 406. 406 is much better looking, but you've mentioned a desire for the weakest engine. Mondeo 2.0 litre is meh but fast enough if needs be. It's a sort of slightly disappointing engine: there's lots of noise and expectation but no underlying good characteristics. Akin to Peter Andre's plastic pectorals: looks good but doesn't really work. Or in the car's case it sounds good; you know like a racy four cylinder should. But there's little associated speed. The V6 is like that but more so. Granted it's a little faster but not loads. It sounds epic though.
I appreciate this doesn't help very much but I'd pick the Mondeo for image. If you care about that kind of thing (I do) the 406 coupe is very much in the woods. It's got the whiff of 'loser coupe' about it. You know.... The man who drives a cheap old two door because he doesn't have sufficient friends/family to justify having a big car. In his head it's a bra-snapping, pheromone belching sex machine. In reality it's a clapped out banger trying too hard. Generally seen parked outside the entrance of the only nightclub in town playing Earth, Wind and Fire; possibly even whilst the owner lounges on it to show off his fraying leather jacket.
This happens to all coupes. One day it will be cool again; witness Capri, Manta, Fox Mustang, Camaro, Jaguar XJS et al.
Mondeo it is then Of the others I haven't driven a 206 GTi, but I'd guess for £1,000 you won't be getting the best one. I've driven other variants but you're probs doing too many miles to make a small car fun.
Which leaves Mondeo vs 406. 406 is much better looking, but you've mentioned a desire for the weakest engine. Mondeo 2.0 litre is meh but fast enough if needs be. It's a sort of slightly disappointing engine: there's lots of noise and expectation but no underlying good characteristics. Akin to Peter Andre's plastic pectorals: looks good but doesn't really work. Or in the car's case it sounds good; you know like a racy four cylinder should. But there's little associated speed. The V6 is like that but more so. Granted it's a little faster but not loads. It sounds epic though.
I appreciate this doesn't help very much but I'd pick the Mondeo for image. If you care about that kind of thing (I do) the 406 coupe is very much in the woods. It's got the whiff of 'loser coupe' about it. You know.... The man who drives a cheap old two door because he doesn't have sufficient friends/family to justify having a big car. In his head it's a bra-snapping, pheromone belching sex machine. In reality it's a clapped out banger trying too hard. Generally seen parked outside the entrance of the only nightclub in town playing Earth, Wind and Fire; possibly even whilst the owner lounges on it to show off his fraying leather jacket.
This happens to all coupes. One day it will be cool again; witness Capri, Manta, Fox Mustang, Camaro, Jaguar XJS et al.
Edited by MagneticMeerkat on Sunday 14th September 20:57
206 is nasty in every way even in gti form.
406 Coupe looks good and is a fair place to sit, in 2.0 petrol though it's missing a certain je ne sais quoi.
Mondeo is perfectly happy as a commuter machine and there will be hundreds in your budget.
Mazda is an upgrade on the Mondeo until something goes wrong and then it's a huge pain in the bum.
406 Coupe looks good and is a fair place to sit, in 2.0 petrol though it's missing a certain je ne sais quoi.
Mondeo is perfectly happy as a commuter machine and there will be hundreds in your budget.
Mazda is an upgrade on the Mondeo until something goes wrong and then it's a huge pain in the bum.
Mk3 Mondeos are really very good cars. Truth be told, thinking from the head they are all the car that you could ever need. I had a 1.8 estate which was, bar an EGR valve, utterly reliable, economical (low-mid 30's combined driving, 40ish dual carriageway), comfortable, surprisingly chuckable but did feel underpowered. £1k will get you a very good pre-facelift hatch.
My 2.0 Mondeo was bought after a similar What Car thread on here.
18 months and >20K later it's been very, very good. Economical and no faults to speak of. It swallows everything I can throw at it, is great on the motorway and helps iron out the bumps around town much better than smaller cars.
Also, I'm going to speak up for the 2.0 engine, I find it quite suitable for a daily hack, it pulls away noisily but adequately in first and then possible to change straight to third. It's actually very tractable for a 4 pot, I don't need to change gear too often if I'm feeling lazy. If you're prepared to rev it hard then you'll find it more than quick enough for town and motorway driving.
Go into the purchase expecting to get a reliable and dependable hack that'll look after you in any situation, but may not put a massive grin on your face and you won't be disappointed
18 months and >20K later it's been very, very good. Economical and no faults to speak of. It swallows everything I can throw at it, is great on the motorway and helps iron out the bumps around town much better than smaller cars.
Also, I'm going to speak up for the 2.0 engine, I find it quite suitable for a daily hack, it pulls away noisily but adequately in first and then possible to change straight to third. It's actually very tractable for a 4 pot, I don't need to change gear too often if I'm feeling lazy. If you're prepared to rev it hard then you'll find it more than quick enough for town and motorway driving.
Go into the purchase expecting to get a reliable and dependable hack that'll look after you in any situation, but may not put a massive grin on your face and you won't be disappointed
hacksaw said:
Ran a 2.3 mazda 6 for over 3 years and 40k, never missed a beat, regular services and tyres were all it needed. In my opinion a nicer place to be then a mundano, but was thirsty.
IMO and experience (we have a 2006 Mazda 6 MPS) the specification is better in the Mondeo. Even the top end Mazda was rather sparse on kit and the top end ones seemed far rarer when I was looking (although I was looking for an estate[1]).The Mazda 6 even in the lower spec models is arguably a better more fun steer but not worth arguing over when your other car is an M5 and you're after a sensible car (and the Mondeo is a very good handling car)...
[1] I ended up with serious feature creep and got a Mk4 Mondeo 2.5T but that's another story.
Edited by Fastdruid on Sunday 14th September 23:37
Mondeo? Not for me. Genuine article Pininfarina coach-built coupe, with soft ride and comfortable leather Recaro seats:
Consider the 2.2 petrol if you want a 4-pot petrol, but smart money is on the 3.0 V6 - especially the later model (2001 onwards) version, engine code ES9J4, which was developed in conjunction with Porsche, giving it variable valve timing - 210 HP stock - while being reasonably fuel-efficient.
Consider the 2.2 petrol if you want a 4-pot petrol, but smart money is on the 3.0 V6 - especially the later model (2001 onwards) version, engine code ES9J4, which was developed in conjunction with Porsche, giving it variable valve timing - 210 HP stock - while being reasonably fuel-efficient.
I've got a 206 GTI - at your budget you'd be looking at the earlier 138bhp cars.
On the plus side I'd say fuel economy is decent although the car feels like it needs a sixth gear at 70mph. It is well specced by little car standards (mine has alcantara/leather seats and trim, rain sensitive wipers, climate control, multi cd and a huge panoramic sunroof). So far it has been utterly reliable and it feels well screwed together. They still look pretty too.
It is not a "fun" car and never inspires you for a backroad blast. My Puma was way more entertaining despite having ropey suspension and worn tyres. Pedal position is awful and if, like me, you have size 12 feet you'll need to wear the thinnest shoes or go barefoot. I've really struggled to get a good seating position too. Look for worn steering wheels and flaky alloys.
Apparently the thermostat is an issue on these cars (cheap fix) but mine if fine - although be aware that you might think it is warming up slowly before realising the large temp guage is actually oil temperature...
On the plus side I'd say fuel economy is decent although the car feels like it needs a sixth gear at 70mph. It is well specced by little car standards (mine has alcantara/leather seats and trim, rain sensitive wipers, climate control, multi cd and a huge panoramic sunroof). So far it has been utterly reliable and it feels well screwed together. They still look pretty too.
It is not a "fun" car and never inspires you for a backroad blast. My Puma was way more entertaining despite having ropey suspension and worn tyres. Pedal position is awful and if, like me, you have size 12 feet you'll need to wear the thinnest shoes or go barefoot. I've really struggled to get a good seating position too. Look for worn steering wheels and flaky alloys.
Apparently the thermostat is an issue on these cars (cheap fix) but mine if fine - although be aware that you might think it is warming up slowly before realising the large temp guage is actually oil temperature...
MagneticMeerkat said:
I'd stay away from the Mazda. They're pretty much the same as the Mondeo, but with a fatal issue. The rustproofing didn't work. A Mondeo of that age may have a bit, but Mazda 6s tend to actually rot away. Which is not a good thing.
This. My wife has a 2004 Mazda 6 and it is rusting quite badly. Not MOT failure just yet but it looks a right mess.They aren't the same as the Mondeo though, totally different cars.
Devil2575 said:
MagneticMeerkat said:
I'd stay away from the Mazda. They're pretty much the same as the Mondeo, but with a fatal issue. The rustproofing didn't work. A Mondeo of that age may have a bit, but Mazda 6s tend to actually rot away. Which is not a good thing.
This. My wife has a 2004 Mazda 6 and it is rusting quite badly. Not MOT failure just yet but it looks a right mess.We put about 30k on a 138 HP 206 GTI from almost new.
Really disappointing drive. Not particularly quick and horribly under geared - 80 mph in 5th is 4000rpm. Not a very comfortable driving position, the pedals are offset, the gear lever was too far away with the seat back. Very sloppy long throw gear change.
Handling was ok and it'd get high 30s mpg on a longish run.
Nothing went wrong, apart for a couple of electrical issues, but everything about the car was cheap and flimsy with numerous rattles and badly fitting body panels and interior trim. Probably the worst screwed together car we've ever owned.
Glad to see the back of it.
Really disappointing drive. Not particularly quick and horribly under geared - 80 mph in 5th is 4000rpm. Not a very comfortable driving position, the pedals are offset, the gear lever was too far away with the seat back. Very sloppy long throw gear change.
Handling was ok and it'd get high 30s mpg on a longish run.
Nothing went wrong, apart for a couple of electrical issues, but everything about the car was cheap and flimsy with numerous rattles and badly fitting body panels and interior trim. Probably the worst screwed together car we've ever owned.
Glad to see the back of it.
Edited by Jaguar steve on Monday 15th September 12:21
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff