RE: Peugeot 306 GTI-6 | Cars under the hammer

[marketappeal]

Turbobanana said:

Ha, didn't think it would be long before someone trotted out that old nonsense.

How did we all survive?

By not crashing our 205s. In my case a CTi with wonderful handling that I gleefully slid (or bounced) round every corner I could find.

I replaced it with a 306 1.8XT if memory serves me, which had a sluggish 8v engine, not suited to the chassis. I'd only had it a day or two when I slid it into a curb in the rain damaging the rear axle. I rang my mates to ruefully explain that "it doesn't handle like a 205".

[JErrrB]

Have owned all of 1.6 205GTi, 306 Rallye, 306GTi6 and now a 208GTi bps. Really the Rallye was the most brilliant, the 306GTi the most comfortable, also handled brilliantly (but not quite as agile as the Rallye). The 208 bps is even better than both, having the lsd. But I still miss the 306 Rallye and GTi6, wonderful cars. Had a Ph3 in China blue just like this one, 2000 X reg. Rallye in red. Imho the design of the 306 will stay a timeless classic for a long time - nothing unnecessary.

[s m]

Not a Diesel said:

The 90's was not that great for hot hatches despite the list. Insurance was making them impossible to insure hence a load of warm hatches.

By the end of the 90's very few of the hatches were faster than an Astra GTE 16v from 1988. They had gotten heavier and were still using 2.0 litre with a tiny bit more power and the same torque. Although handling/build quality/safety all did.

Jap stuff like the Impreza Turbo was also very well priced with similar weight and more power/traction.

I had a 2000 model GTI-6 as my daily replacing a P1 & and E30 M3 before. Was a great car but very very boring to look at. The run-out HDi looked identical.

I test drove a couple and a DC2 Integra ( could not be arsed chasing red line) and a Corrado VR6 ( seemed more understeery than 306. Never drive your hero's) & decided on the 306GTi-6 was best all rounder.

Never had any issues other than trying to get wheels balance properly. Surprisingly difficult it seemed.

Solid centres like the Saxo VTS and 106?

[Jon_S_Rally]

Turbobanana said:

Ha, didn't think it would be long before someone trotted out that old nonsense.

How did we all survive?

It's not nonsense at all. Time has moved on. Not many people would want to drive a 30-year old car every day when they could drive something that's safer, more comfortable and better equipped.

[s m]

TheMilkyBarKid said:

daytona111r said:

How does this compare to a 205 GTI 1.9 for handling and sheer driving exhilaration?? I suspect it would be much friendlier and less spikey at the limit.

Owned both back in the day but it was over 20 years ago so do take my recollections with a pinch of salt. On modern tyres I think both would be much less prone to snap lift off oversteer than they were in the 1990’s when I owned mine.

The 306 was definitely better built with a much nicer interior than the 205’s yoghurt pot plastics, and it was better for long hauls on the motorway but even the 306 in my case was hardly a paragon of reliability. The 205 had less weight transfer in quick left-right changes of direction (which is obvious really) and grip wise I remember both could be pushed right up to the limit and slightly beyond and you’d know exactly what the front wheels were doing at all times. The figures say the 306 was quicker but from what I remember it didn’t really feel like there’s was much in it up to about 80mph, though that was possibly down to the difference in refinement.

As for the 306 being far friendlier and less spiky, I wouldn’t be so sure. Put it this way - and this may well be down to luck - I never had any incidents in my 205 but my 306 ended it’s days in a Staffordshire hedge when I ran out of talent on a damp roundabout one fateful night. They definitely still had the ability to bite if you overcooked it but as above I think that tendency would be reduced for both now on modern tyres.

Both still great drivers cars though and I’d love another of either in my garage.

I think one journo still found it likely to catch you out when pushed







Neil Hunt from Revs mag exploring the handling limits in the late 90s

[Turbobanana]

Jon_S_Rally said:

Turbobanana said:

Ha, didn't think it would be long before someone trotted out that old nonsense.

How did we all survive?

It's not nonsense at all. Time has moved on. Not many people would want to drive a 30-year old car every day when they could drive something that's safer, more comfortable and better equipped.

I have never disputed, nor will ever dispute that point.

My problem is that people seem to believe that old cars are not safe. We now rely so much on driver aids and convenience that we don't take enough responsibility for our own actions.

Yesterday I commuted to work, in the rain, in a 53 year old Triumph GT6. I never felt like I was about to die.

But I respect your view. I originally raised the point to ask what Jack felt was unsuitable about daily driving a car that was designed for daily driving. I await his view on the subject.

[J4CKO]

Jon_S_Rally said:

Turbobanana said:

Ha, didn't think it would be long before someone trotted out that old nonsense.

How did we all survive?

It's not nonsense at all. Time has moved on. Not many people would want to drive a 30-year old car every day when they could drive something that's safer, more comfortable and better equipped.

The thing is, those who crashed a car and died from their injuries in the 80s and 90s arent around to post on PH, so its not a case of "How did we all survive", as not all did. Though I dont think the roads were massively dangerous then, but they were more dangerous and cars less safe by a huge margin,



I would take a Clio 182 or 197 over the eighties stuff as it does the same job by and large and is built a lot more with crash survival in mind, wouldnt stop me driving the old ones, probably like a tit but not sure I would buy one again anyway.

Lad I know binned his 205 GTI 1.9, got the insurance payout then binned the replacement within a month or two, and both times that was the lift of oversteer, or a crash as a lot of folk know it. Cars like that draw you in, you go faster and faster and then, unless you have the skill or the space it spits you out, modern stuff protects the inexperienced with ESP, you were on your own back then !

I had a MK2 Golf GTI try to kill me, back end came round, wasnt going that fast but had some Avons on the back and new Yokohamas on the front, bad combination, managed to collect it back up but went home and arranged for some matching rear tyres.

[Every day a journey]

Amazing lift-off oversteer on these!

A lot of fun.

[F1GTRUeno]

Turbobanana said:

Jon_S_Rally said:

Turbobanana said:

Ha, didn't think it would be long before someone trotted out that old nonsense.

How did we all survive?

It's not nonsense at all. Time has moved on. Not many people would want to drive a 30-year old car every day when they could drive something that's safer, more comfortable and better equipped.

I have never disputed, nor will ever dispute that point.

My problem is that people seem to believe that old cars are not safe. We now rely so much on driver aids and convenience that we don't take enough responsibility for our own actions.

Yesterday I commuted to work, in the rain, in a 53 year old Triumph GT6. I never felt like I was about to die.

But I respect your view. I originally raised the point to ask what Jack felt was unsuitable about daily driving a car that was designed for daily driving. I await his view on the subject.

I meant it purely from a build quality point of view, not the handling side.

It was made out of crisp packets and the crash structure is probably non-existent so if you did have a crash, it'd be more likely you'd be seriously injured or worse. An 80's Peugeot in a collision with a modern car for instance wouldn't end very well I imagine.

[greenarrow]

s m said:

I think one journo still found it likely to catch you out when pushed







Neil Hunt from Revs mag exploring the handling limits in the late 90s

I love to see this picture make an appearance on every 306 thread, think it was a D Turbo if i remember correctly, or an XSI. Yeah, I think the 306 was one of those cars where generally it was less tail happy, but if it did get away from you, due to the longer wheelbase you were done!

Lot of comments about 80s cars on here and crash worthiness. Thing is, this is a 90s cars we are discussing which weighed about 300KG more than the 205 GTI. Modern tyres in my experience with a 205 GTI mean it was less likely to lift off oversteer and probably most people WONT be using this every day but as a fun car for the weekends, so personally I don't think the relative flimsiness is a deal breaker. My wife dailied a 205 GTI between 2003 and 2014 and both my kids were ferried around in it and lived to tell the tale as they say. She was generally only pottering around locally and did get hit once (admittedly at low speed) by a van and the car survived fine.

[C5_Steve]

JErrrB said:

Have owned all of 1.6 205GTi, 306 Rallye, 306GTi6 and now a 208GTi bps. Really the Rallye was the most brilliant, the 306GTi the most comfortable, also handled brilliantly (but not quite as agile as the Rallye). The 208 bps is even better than both, having the lsd. But I still miss the 306 Rallye and GTi6, wonderful cars. Had a Ph3 in China blue just like this one, 2000 X reg. Rallye in red. Imho the design of the 306 will stay a timeless classic for a long time - nothing unnecessary.

Interesting, the weight saving between the GTi and the Rallye was quite small if I remember rightly, did it really make that much of a difference?

[s m]

C5_Steve said:

JErrrB said:

Have owned all of 1.6 205GTi, 306 Rallye, 306GTi6 and now a 208GTi bps. Really the Rallye was the most brilliant, the 306GTi the most comfortable, also handled brilliantly (but not quite as agile as the Rallye). The 208 bps is even better than both, having the lsd. But I still miss the 306 Rallye and GTi6, wonderful cars. Had a Ph3 in China blue just like this one, 2000 X reg. Rallye in red. Imho the design of the 306 will stay a timeless classic for a long time - nothing unnecessary.

Interesting, the weight saving between the GTi and the Rallye was quite small if I remember rightly, did it really make that much of a difference?

Approximately 51kg difference according to the car scales at Millbrook

[s m]

greenarrow said:

s m said:

I think one journo still found it likely to catch you out when pushed







Neil Hunt from Revs mag exploring the handling limits in the late 90s

I love to see this picture make an appearance on every 306 thread, think it was a D Turbo if i remember correctly, or an XSI. Yeah, I think the 306 was one of those cars where generally it was less tail happy, but if it did get away from you, due to the longer wheelbase you were done!

Lot of comments about 80s cars on here and crash worthiness. Thing is, this is a 90s cars we are discussing which weighed about 300KG more than the 205 GTI. Modern tyres in my experience with a 205 GTI mean it was less likely to lift off oversteer and probably most people WONT be using this every day but as a fun car for the weekends, so personally I don't think the relative flimsiness is a deal breaker. My wife dailied a 205 GTI between 2003 and 2014 and both my kids were ferried around in it and lived to tell the tale as they say. She was generally only pottering around locally and did get hit once (admittedly at low speed) by a van and the car survived fine.

well I guess it is rare for a mag to catch an on road crash of a test car like that
I think it was an XSi or S16 that he crunched but I’d have to go and check the reg number to be sure

You’re right though on the weight of the GTI-6 - obviously a bigger and newer car than the 205 1.9 GTi - 33% heavier albeit with stuff like aircon. The GTI-6 was actually heavier than my Sierra with an all iron 2.8litre 6-pot up front

The thing that always struck me as slightly odd about them in new tests, great as they are on road, was that they often seemed to be too lairy on track to set a great time, often beaten by its little cousin the 106Gti or Saxo VTS
Possibly down to the Michelins fitted not being as good as the Pirellis/Michelins on the smaller cars.
The passive rear steer effect seemed to hobble the Citroen ZX16v and Xsara too when it came to setting a great time on track ….. although probably great fun in the drivers seat

[cerb4.5lee]

J4CKO said:

Jon_S_Rally said:

Turbobanana said:

Ha, didn't think it would be long before someone trotted out that old nonsense.

How did we all survive?

It's not nonsense at all. Time has moved on. Not many people would want to drive a 30-year old car every day when they could drive something that's safer, more comfortable and better equipped.

The thing is, those who crashed a car and died from their injuries in the 80s and 90s arent around to post on PH, so its not a case of "How did we all survive", as not all did. Though I dont think the roads were massively dangerous then, but they were more dangerous and cars less safe by a huge margin,



I would take a Clio 182 or 197 over the eighties stuff as it does the same job by and large and is built a lot more with crash survival in mind, wouldnt stop me driving the old ones, probably like a tit but not sure I would buy one again anyway.

Lad I know binned his 205 GTI 1.9, got the insurance payout then binned the replacement within a month or two, and both times that was the lift of oversteer, or a crash as a lot of folk know it. Cars like that draw you in, you go faster and faster and then, unless you have the skill or the space it spits you out, modern stuff protects the inexperienced with ESP, you were on your own back then !

I had a MK2 Golf GTI try to kill me, back end came round, wasnt going that fast but had some Avons on the back and new Yokohamas on the front, bad combination, managed to collect it back up but went home and arranged for some matching rear tyres.

I remember my 1992 Escort RS2000 doing that to me as well on a roundabout once, and that experience basically put me off FWD in some ways in fairness. At the time I actually felt more confident controlling a RWD car in comparison.

I felt like I could handle oversteer in a RWD car, but being honest...I didn't have a clue at the time when a FWD car did it though for sure!

[TheMilkyBarKid]

s m said:

I think one journo still found it likely to catch you out when pushed







Neil Hunt from Revs mag exploring the handling limits in the late 90s

That’s pretty much how it went when I explored the handling limits of mine too

[cerb4.5lee]

F1GTRUeno said:

Turbobanana said:

Jon_S_Rally said:

Turbobanana said:

Ha, didn't think it would be long before someone trotted out that old nonsense.

How did we all survive?

It's not nonsense at all. Time has moved on. Not many people would want to drive a 30-year old car every day when they could drive something that's safer, more comfortable and better equipped.

I have never disputed, nor will ever dispute that point.

My problem is that people seem to believe that old cars are not safe. We now rely so much on driver aids and convenience that we don't take enough responsibility for our own actions.

Yesterday I commuted to work, in the rain, in a 53 year old Triumph GT6. I never felt like I was about to die.

But I respect your view. I originally raised the point to ask what Jack felt was unsuitable about daily driving a car that was designed for daily driving. I await his view on the subject.

I meant it purely from a build quality point of view, not the handling side.

It was made out of crisp packets and the crash structure is probably non-existent so if you did have a crash, it'd be more likely you'd be seriously injured or worse. An 80's Peugeot in a collision with a modern car for instance wouldn't end very well I imagine.

I've been in an AX GT and Fiat Uno Turbo i e as a passenger, and I've driven a Cinquecento Sporting as well. I can honestly say that I wouldn't want a crash in any of them, and I didn't want a crash in them back then...so I definitely don't now!

I reckon that a napkin feels heavier and more solid than the doors do in those cars to be fair!

It was a great time to be alive though for sure, and most of us did survive anyway I'd imagine regardless.

[Mike_Wood]

Sorry, anyone who criticises a 205 GTI. 309 GTi or a 306 GTi for being too mobile at the rear, really doesn't know how to drive a fwd car properly

[cerb4.5lee]

Mike_Wood said:

Sorry, anyone who criticises a 205 GTI. 309 GTi or a 306 GTi for being too mobile at the rear, really doesn't know how to drive a fwd car properly

I'm definitely in that camp for sure!

For me, I'd personally take a RWD car over a FWD all day everyday. However, that isn't to say that I'm right though for sure.

[Forester1965]

Did my ARDS at Croft in one back in the day. A very flowing drive. Proof you don't need ultra-stiff everything for enjoyment. In some ways it felt like a hatchback equivalent of a MK1 Elise.

[BadOrangePete]

Had 2 and loved both of them (Wish I still had the sigma blue phase 1) I never really had any problems with LOOS unless I really provoked them. Wouldn't want to daily one these days though TBH remember they both had heavy clutches and ran hot in traffic.