RE: Renault 19 16v: Catch It While You Can

[STiG911]

I remember having quite the want for the saloon version. Then I found out Andrew Ridgely had one

[ZX10R NIN]

I had a Chamade version of these while I was having some work done on one of my cars, I had throttle bodies fitted & it was a great car good fun I have fond memories of this car.

[anonymous-user]

spanky3 said:

I had a beautiful phase 1 Chamade in Blue. Wonderful to drive, near zero body roll, the window switches were on the dash and it had yellow driving lights (pretty cool, eh).

Trouble was all that Gallic flair came with Gallic build quality. The engine is unusual in that the exhaust manifold is at the back, wrapped around the starter motor which gets cooked. The engine bay runs stupid-hot all the time. The alternator failed. The clutch cables snap. Often. CV joints, springs. You get the idea.

When it worked it was fantastic.. just don't expect the start motor to turn over if the engine's hot.

You've brought back the memories! This is the exact spec of my old dears 19. I fondly remember driving it and admiring the look of the spoiler when glancing in the rear view mirror.

In terms of avoiding the reliability issues, I'm wondering how easy it would be to drop, say a clio 172 engine and box into a nice 19 with decent bodywork? (If such a thing exists...)

Anyone here tried something like it?

Edit to add: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=stHGlXEMEvY

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 23 March 10:01

[ThePeach]

had a high miler phase 2 in the late 90s. every electric continually went wrong, but the driving experience was sublime def would like a decent one for the stable

[Nealio]

DoubleTime said:

spanky3 said:

I had a beautiful phase 1 Chamade in Blue. Wonderful to drive, near zero body roll, the window switches were on the dash and it had yellow driving lights (pretty cool, eh).

Trouble was all that Gallic flair came with Gallic build quality. The engine is unusual in that the exhaust manifold is at the back, wrapped around the starter motor which gets cooked. The engine bay runs stupid-hot all the time. The alternator failed. The clutch cables snap. Often. CV joints, springs. You get the idea.

When it worked it was fantastic.. just don't expect the start motor to turn over if the engine's hot.

You've brought back the memories! This is the exact spec of my old dears 19. I fondly remember driving it and admiring the look of the spoiler when glancing in the rear view mirror.

In terms of avoiding the reliability issues, I'm wondering how easy it would be to drop, say a clio 172 engine and box into a nice 19 with decent bodywork? (If such a thing exists...)

Anyone here tried something like it?

Edit to add: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=stHGlXEMEvY

Edited by DoubleTime on Thursday 23 March 10:01

Super easy with a ph1 (cable throttle) 172 engine and decoded ECU is the answer.

The gearbox is for all intents and purposes the same as the 19’s and in fact the gearbox ‘4th' mount on the clio is a 19 part. The 172 engine is a relative of the 19 16V engine too with all the same mounting bosses. So bit of work on the exhaust manifold/downpipe and it drops straight in.

[mcford]

I had a good trip out in a rental one which was quite new at the time. Started off in Suffolk, went south around the M25, dropped my boss off in Croydon so that he could collect a Volvo and I carried on to Heathrow airport where I swapped it for a Peugeot 605 SV 3 litre. It was a lovely way to spend a new years eve.

[northernmedia]

jeremyc said:

I loved my silvery greeny metallic grey phase 1 hatchback with the black 'Executive Pack' leather interior.

As the article says, surprisingly quick, and very comfortable. Happy memories of driving it to Austria for a skiing holiday.

Alas H508HLF has long since gone to the Gallic graveyard du voiture.

H252FOT is still very much about and is 75% restored, not quite enough for me to buy it though when it came up for sale last year.

I absolutely loved my phase 1 blue 16V, very fond memories.

[horster]

I had a blue one which I still remember the reg (m174 rkx). Bought it around 1999. Crashed it once only to find it had been in a big crash before I bought it. Bonnet was red underneath and windscreen trim had been pierced by bodywork. To be fair it never broke down other than clutch cable snapping. I sold it to buy a nissan pulsar gtir. I then bought another 19 16v in white off a friend's dad for 750 quid after the Nissan was too expensive for me to run when I changed jobs. The white one I have photos of at home. Sold it for 1400 over a year later. Have great memories of being 21 and driving that car. Going to annual Doncaster car show. Fortunately I couldn't afford to modify it much......which was probably a good thing. Lusting after some 17 inch dare alloys for it.

[anonymous-user]

Nealio said:

DoubleTime said:

spanky3 said:

I had a beautiful phase 1 Chamade in Blue. Wonderful to drive, near zero body roll, the window switches were on the dash and it had yellow driving lights (pretty cool, eh).

Trouble was all that Gallic flair came with Gallic build quality. The engine is unusual in that the exhaust manifold is at the back, wrapped around the starter motor which gets cooked. The engine bay runs stupid-hot all the time. The alternator failed. The clutch cables snap. Often. CV joints, springs. You get the idea.

When it worked it was fantastic.. just don't expect the start motor to turn over if the engine's hot.

You've brought back the memories! This is the exact spec of my old dears 19. I fondly remember driving it and admiring the look of the spoiler when glancing in the rear view mirror.

In terms of avoiding the reliability issues, I'm wondering how easy it would be to drop, say a clio 172 engine and box into a nice 19 with decent bodywork? (If such a thing exists...)

Anyone here tried something like it?

Edit to add: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=stHGlXEMEvY

Edited by anonymous-user on Thursday 23 March 10:01

Super easy with a ph1 (cable throttle) 172 engine and decoded ECU is the answer.

The gearbox is for all intents and purposes the same as the 19’s and in fact the gearbox ‘4th' mount on the clio is a 19 part. The 172 engine is a relative of the 19 16V engine too with all the same mounting bosses. So bit of work on the exhaust manifold/downpipe and it drops straight in.

I thought the 172 engine was an evo of the f16 I.e. but didn't know about the mounts or the box. Interesting.....

[RWD cossie wil]

tonyb1968 said:

RWD cossie wil said:

dme123 said:

s m said:

That does smack somewhat of badge snobbery - why is it believable that a Golf Gti would be over 5k but an RS under 5k is astonishing?

The RS2000 got very good reviews - it's not quite the same as the SOTW Mk6 that came up recently

It only got good reviews because offending Ford with their vast marketing budget was commercial suicide for any mag. Anyone who has driven any variant of FWD Escort and a few of its contemporaries can give you the truth about them: absolute fking crap once you take off the rose tinted spectacles.

The Renault 19 was so lively and had such sweet and eager engines even in cooking spec it is hardly comparable to the Dagenham Dustbins.

Having owned both a phase 2 19 16v, and a Mk5 RS2000, I would take the RS2K every time. Far better built, great Recaro seats, better engine by a country mile, and far more grip. The only thing the Renault did better is sound nicer once a cone filter was fitted, and break down, a lot.

The 19 16v was a bitter sweet car for me, enjoyed it, but the constant breaking, plus being an utter PITA to work on meant in the end it had to go. The RS2K I had got hammered day in day out for a year & a half, and never broke. I only sold it to buy another Saph Cosworth off a mate, who took the RS2K in p/x... he ended up keeping it for 3 years!

One of my other favorites was my second ever car, a Mk2 Astra GTE16v, chassis was pretty poor, but that red top 2.0xe really was pretty brutal with a bit of mild tuning, and bulletproof as well...

Edited by RWD cossie wil on Thursday 23 March 04:54

Sorry to say but the mk5 RS2000 sucked, it was a poor offering from Ford, the competition produced far better and more reliable cars with better engines and handling.
2 things the RS2000 had going for it, the RS badge and the recaro seats, the rest of the package was poor and was slated by Ford enthusiasts at the time, that didnt mean that it didnt sell, but it was a time when ford produced cars lije the xr3i and xr2i, both poor remakes of previous generations, it was only really the Cosworths that saved Ford's reputation in the performance market.

Class leaders at the time were the Renault 19 16v, Golf GTi 16v mk3 and the Nissan Sunny GTi, Ford were not even in the mix with this lot considering there were still other, and far better cars like the Peugeot 306 S16 (even the XSI was rated a better car than the Ford), Citroen ZX 16v, BMW 318ti etc.

Did you own and run an RS2000 or 19 16v for any length of time? Or are you just reading old magazines?

[northernmedia]

J958 OEL - sadly not taxed since 1999.
I presume it's now long gone.

[Terminator X]

Old enough to remember when they first came out, loved them back then. As article says though almost impossible to find one for sale these days.

TX.

[white_goodman]

I remember being a big fan of these when new (always preferred it to the Clio 16v) and considered a Phase 1 as my first car back in 2000 and again as my second car in 2002 but they were pretty rare even back then and I went down the 205 GTi route instead. Today, I can't see this being as desirable or as solid an investment as a R5 GTT, Clio Williams, 106 Rallye, 205 GTi, Escort RST or mk2 Golf GTi though. It would go in the same class as the 309 GTi for me. It's probably a bit quicker and has a nicer interior than the 309 but although a nice car in its day, it's just as irrelevant as the 309 today.

[R7ETH]

Here was my 19 16valve "Executive" ahh back in the day of Max Power Revs and Fast Car.
I bought the car for £4500 and then sold it 3 years later for £4500, spent £12500 on it in those 3 year though !!!

[Jas_404]

Fond memories of my 1990 Phase 1 16v 3 door in red. It wasn't perfect but was the fastest thing I'd owned at the time (early 20s and this being the late 1990s) and looked great and I only paid £700 for it from a local dealership after someone had traded it in for something else. I enjoyed ragging it everywhere (B roads particularly) until the engine seized with about 70k on it. Sold it on for a few hundred quid. Tried unsuccessfully but not found any in the classifieds since (apart from Chamade/convertible/Phase 2, none of which do it for me) and I'd like to have one again....if only.
BTW, the Phase 1 French market model was called a 16c (not 16v) I believe, and didn't have the bonnet scoop, for some reason - probably a good reason as they used to let the water in

[Jas_404]

[Nealio]

Jas_404 said:

Fond memories of my 1990 Phase 1 16v 3 door in red. It wasn't perfect but was the fastest thing I'd owned at the time (early 20s and this being the late 1990s) and looked great and I only paid £700 for it from a local dealership after someone had traded it in for something else. I enjoyed ragging it everywhere (B roads particularly) until the engine seized with about 70k on it. Sold it on for a few hundred quid. Tried unsuccessfully but not found any in the classifieds since (apart from Chamade/convertible/Phase 2, none of which do it for me) and I'd like to have one again....if only.
BTW, the Phase 1 French market model was called a 16c (not 16v) I believe, and didn't have the bonnet scoop, for some reason - probably a good reason as they used to let the water in

It was called the '16S' - S being short for 'soupape', French for 'valve'

Early continental 16S had some issues with the exhaust manifold cracking, therefore the bonnet vent (not really a scoop at as there's a drip tray under it) was added before it went on sale in the UK, thus all UK cars have it.

[s m]

dme123 said:

s m said:

dme123 said:

s m said:

That does smack somewhat of badge snobbery - why is it believable that a Golf Gti would be over 5k but an RS under 5k is astonishing?

The RS2000 got very good reviews - it's not quite the same as the SOTW Mk6 that came up recently

It only got good reviews because offending Ford with their vast marketing budget was commercial suicide for any mag. Anyone who has driven any variant of FWD Escort and a few of its contemporaries can give you the truth about them: absolute fking crap once you take off the rose tinted spectacles.

The Renault 19 was so lively and had such sweet and eager engines even in cooking spec it is hardly comparable to the Dagefnham Dustbins.

Seriously?

So reviews are only worth listening to if you agree with them and every journalist that wrote that was in the pocket of Ford?

Fiat must have paid a lot then as the Tipo won most of the reviews in this class at that time....or the Civic. Or was that fixed too?

Logical fallacy there. Just because some cars only get good reviews because the publication dare not say anything too negative doesn't mean that's the only way to get good reviews. Some are good cars. Just not the Escort.

Do you actually think the mk3 to mk6 Escorts were at best mediocre to poor compared to the best in class at the time? They were selling them new until 1998 but my 2005 they were pretty much all gone, a testament to their enduring appeal and quality

If you read what I originally wrote you will see that I didn't say all the Mk3 to Mk6 fwd Escorts got good reviews, I said the Mk5 RS2000 was a very different car to something like the boggo Mk6 SOTW that featured a while back - it got good reviews from all the mags whether you believe that to be a conspiracy or not.

You might say it's a logical fallacy.... however, the thing is the mags weren't saying the rest of the range were great.....or had become great by association to the RS2000.

This is Autocar's précis on the Mk5 Escort, ordinary model in 1991 ......they hardly look like they're trying to retain an advertising budget



By all accounts they weren't great driving cars - all the mags are pretty consistent with that view

This is what they wrote about the RS2000 in 1991



They even made a special mention of the RS2000 in their end of year review as it was such a surprise after the ordinary Escorts



After Jackie Stewart drove the Mk5 Escort and said it was basically "rubbish" it was given to John Wheeler at Special Vehicle Engineering who worked the whole car over to come out with something better.

Late 91/1992 the Tipo 16v and Civic VTi were the two cars that had this class of hot hatch sewn up, differences appealed to different mags/drivers They were generally looking at how good/fun a hot hatch it was, driving/handling, rather than build quality - none of these cars were particularly well-built or rust-proofed as we now know

The RS2000 was naturally put up against the best in class ( if you read this below they once again mention how good the RS2000 is compared to the normal Escorts )
The Tipo won, Escort placed second ahead of the Civic in 3rd and Astra GSi in 4th



So, that was one mag, Autocar and their opinion.

Then CAR magazine tested it, once again, up against the Tipo 16v, Civic VTi, Renault 16v, Rover 220Gti and the Astra GSi.

Their opening gambit on the RS2000 was .."it's quick, it's capable, it's fun. Can it really be an Escort? It does make you wonder how, from a base as awful as the standard Escort, Ford can produce a car of this quality"



Once again, the top 2 places went to the Civic and Tipo. The RS2000 took 3rd, the Renault 19 16v 4th, Rover 5th and Astra GSi 6th




Here are Setright's and Bulgin's Counterpoints on the cars - interesting to read their comments on the RS2000



Bulgin......"...as a hot hatch the Ford Escort RS2000 nudges excellence: as a Ford Escort it's mind-warpingly brilliant.... " ......." .......the best car here is the Fiat Tipo ...."





So, not exactly a wooden spoon for the RS2000 from CAR magazine.


Of course, there was also Performance Car magazine around at this time, they didn't test the ordinary versions of cars generally, primarily, as the name suggests, the performance versions although writers would no doubt have their own opinions/experiences of the humdrum models.

This was their opinion on the RS2000 - or at least John Barker's who reviewed the car








There was also the Fast Lane review.

Once again, the Tipo 16v, Civic VTi, Rover 220 Gti and Astra GSi were wheeled out.

Once again, the Tipo got the overall honours, the RS2000 2nd, the Civic and Rover a joint 3rd.....and the Astra GSi a distant 5th place

"....... the RS loves twisty roads..." ...." ....ultimately, the Escort isn't quite as agile as say a 309GTi but it's every bit as entertaining ....the taut chassis is ultra-responsive, full of feedback and truly entertaining. It's without doubt the most amusing of the quintet, offering enthusiastic drivers the bonus of very usable lift-off oversteer......."



So it seems like at least 4 major magazines of the time were roughly in agreement, the RS2000 was substantially better than the normal run of the mill Escort.


However, if you choose to ignore all that and suspect they were all constrained by Ford to say such things, it's still interesting to see what a modern day magazine like Modern Classics thought of it. Bearing in mind the 306Gti-6 was amongst the very best and came out about 5 years after the RS2000 you would expect it to get the highest praise



Peugeot 1st, Escort 2nd





Was the RS2000 class leading? No, you'd look at the Tipo or Civic at that time for that. I certainly don't think it was anywhere near the worst though.

Most of these cars were fairly poorly built, prone to rust, hard to get bits for 25 years later - they were built for driving fun - hence why, as you say, by 2005 most of them were gone

[tonyb1968]

RWD cossie wil said:

tonyb1968 said:

RWD cossie wil said:

dme123 said:

s m said:

That does smack somewhat of badge snobbery - why is it believable that a Golf Gti would be over 5k but an RS under 5k is astonishing?

The RS2000 got very good reviews - it's not quite the same as the SOTW Mk6 that came up recently

It only got good reviews because offending Ford with their vast marketing budget was commercial suicide for any mag. Anyone who has driven any variant of FWD Escort and a few of its contemporaries can give you the truth about them: absolute fking crap once you take off the rose tinted spectacles.

The Renault 19 was so lively and had such sweet and eager engines even in cooking spec it is hardly comparable to the Dagenham Dustbins.

Having owned both a phase 2 19 16v, and a Mk5 RS2000, I would take the RS2K every time. Far better built, great Recaro seats, better engine by a country mile, and far more grip. The only thing the Renault did better is sound nicer once a cone filter was fitted, and break down, a lot.

The 19 16v was a bitter sweet car for me, enjoyed it, but the constant breaking, plus being an utter PITA to work on meant in the end it had to go. The RS2K I had got hammered day in day out for a year & a half, and never broke. I only sold it to buy another Saph Cosworth off a mate, who took the RS2K in p/x... he ended up keeping it for 3 years!

One of my other favorites was my second ever car, a Mk2 Astra GTE16v, chassis was pretty poor, but that red top 2.0xe really was pretty brutal with a bit of mild tuning, and bulletproof as well...

Edited by RWD cossie wil on Thursday 23 March 04:54

Sorry to say but the mk5 RS2000 sucked, it was a poor offering from Ford, the competition produced far better and more reliable cars with better engines and handling.
2 things the RS2000 had going for it, the RS badge and the recaro seats, the rest of the package was poor and was slated by Ford enthusiasts at the time, that didnt mean that it didnt sell, but it was a time when ford produced cars lije the xr3i and xr2i, both poor remakes of previous generations, it was only really the Cosworths that saved Ford's reputation in the performance market.

Class leaders at the time were the Renault 19 16v, Golf GTi 16v mk3 and the Nissan Sunny GTi, Ford were not even in the mix with this lot considering there were still other, and far better cars like the Peugeot 306 S16 (even the XSI was rated a better car than the Ford), Citroen ZX 16v, BMW 318ti etc.

Did you own and run an RS2000 or 19 16v for any length of time? Or are you just reading old magazines?

Over 4 years of ownership of a new R19 16v, had a mate with an RS2000 and one with a Mk3 Golf GTI 16v, where as the R19 wasnt quite as quick as the golf it was as quick as the ford and handled better than both, both the other owners were impressed with the handling of the Renault and having drove both, it was the best of three.
The Golf was pretty close but the RS2000 wasnt, it just felt... ok but not special, and the engine... not nice compared to the others.
So yes, some experience with these cars that were nearly new and not poorly maintained boy racer sheds.

[Strugs]

Ah French hot hatches.. always had a soft spot for the 'sub-halo' models too.. had two 309GTis (at the same time!) back in the day, and then a spell of 'halo' with ZX Volcane followed by ZX 16v and the then latterly a 306 GTi-6.. "the one that got away" for me, though - when I couldn't a 5 (or a Clio) was the Renault 11 Turbo.. mmmm...