Today

Peugeot RCZ R | Spotted

So the RCZ could be making a return - time to remember when the original finally came good 

---

If overshadowed a tad by the E-T16, the return of the Peugeot RCZ in the form of the Vision concept was very welcome indeed. Heaven knows we need more coupes in the world, and most definitely the affordable, stylish kind. Peugeot is non-committal for the moment - and it won’t be making a 500hp two-door anytime soon - but it has previously made an RCZ concept ahead of a production version. So there’s hope… 

The first one was undoubtedly popular. Maybe it wasn’t the greatest coupe in the world to drive - and the Aldi TT jibes were mean - but it was stylish, brisk and attractively priced. So we bought plenty of them over here, the combination of glamour and value being hard to ignore. You wouldn’t be against something similar happening a second time around. 

The R was when the RCZ came really, really good, however. Expectations weren’t exactly high when the project was announced, because Peugeot hadn’t made a driver’s car of note for yonks. But it put all of Peugeot Sport’s engineering might behind the flagship, with wider tracks, new suspension, huge Alcon brakes and a standard limited-slip diff. Plenty of the features that came to characterise the very good Peugeots that followed - think 208 GTI Peugeot Sport and 308 GTI - were introduced here. It was formidably fast, too, with 270hp from what was at the time the world’s most powerful 1.6: forged Mahle pistons, new rods, a bigger turbo and intercooler plus a totally overhauled exhaust system gave the little four-cylinder the power and the sound to match its flagship status.

Bring that together and the R was riotously good fun, firm and focused (and fast) in a way that the standard, sloppy RCZ never could be. Perhaps it wasn’t quite as sharp as the Renaultsport Meganes of the day, though the fact it could stand up in those comparisons indicated what a transformation the R was. 

So, obviously, barely any sold at all. At £32k, the R looked expensive (it was a while ago now), taking the RCZ into rear-drive coupe territory (think 370Z) while also going without the practicality of a traditional front-drive hot hatch. No doubt some weren’t keen on the Peugeot badge, too - their loss. 

The case is much easier to make for the R these days. Because it’ll still drive great and undoubtedly looks fab, but also now has modern classic rarity - as well as a sub-£10k price - in its favour. Any future RCZ will be a very different prospect to this, a manual-only, 1,280kg, turbo rocketship. This particular one looks especially good, in the Moroccan Red launch colour with 11 services and a fresh cambelt to its name. Even the outrageously bolstered seats have endured 75k pretty well. Make sure the brakes are in good order - they're pricey to replace - and don’t expect a TT-grade interior. But do expect to have enough fun not to really care.    

---

SPECIFICATION | PEUGEOT RCZ R

Engine: 1,598cc, 4-cyl turbocharged
Transmission: 6-speed manual, front-wheel drive, limited-slip diff
Power (hp): 270@6,000rpm
Torque (lb ft): 243@1,900-5,500rpm
MPG: 44.8 (NEDC combined)
CO2: 145g/km
First registered: 2015
Recorded mileage: 74,000
Price new: £31,995
Yours for: £9,000

See the original advert

[Cryssys]

Never driven one but always thought they were a good looking little car. At the sort of money being talked about here it could be an interesting left field choice.

[Andy665]

The Alcon brakes are extremely expensive to replace, the roof rails tarnish very badly but its a good looking car and often thought about purchasing one, a lot more expensive than the admittedly less capable 200bhp model though

[JJJ.]

A car that never came to my attention, rightly or wrongly.

[TikTak]

Always thought these were more interesting to look at and to drive than the equivalent TT. Cheaper too.

Still have a little look and appreciation of the double bubble roof when I see one.

[J4CKO]

Dont mind these, but they seemed to have disappeared to an extent, were they never that numerous ?

Have the "Prince" engine issues done for a lot of them ?

[Watcher of the skies]

Price seems a little ambitious

[nismo48]

A very competent car and road tested one back in 2016. It was a couple of years old and at £18k a good buy.
I ended up in a Clio RS200, one of the last they made as it suited me just that bit more at the time.

[jiggawhat2k]

Always liked the look of these, apart from the wheels. I don't think the price is bad considering the rarity and performance.

[andymadmak]

A friend had one of these from new and she loved it. I drove it a few times and I thought it was OK, but I did find the ride waaaay too firm and jiggly. I actually got car sick driving it across the Yorkshire moors due to the surface topography and the suspension's tendency to bounce vertically.
The interior was OK too, but not a patch on the equivalent Audi TT in terms of fit and finish. I saw it as a "nearly car" - a little more chassis work and it could have been excellent

[Heaveho]

There seems to be a fair few of the 200 brake models on offer cheaply, from the ones I've noticed, they seem to suffer with engine issues, which would explain the prices I've seen them at.

[cerb4.5lee]

I'd definitely entertain one of these I think, and don't mind the way they look either. Although in general I do tend to go towards RWD though in comparison.

[itcaptainslow]

Cambelt…weren’t these still chain driven? And indeed, the chain was one of the car’s foibles!

[WPA]

itcaptainslow said:

Cambelt weren t these still chain driven? And indeed, the chain was one of the car s foibles!

Correct, these used the Prince engine with well documented failures

[Robertb]

WPA said:

itcaptainslow said:

Cambelt weren t these still chain driven? And indeed, the chain was one of the car s foibles!

Correct, these used the Prince engine with well documented failures

Hmm, the ad for this one claims a cambelt change has been done. Maybe they meant chain.

I'd imagine the Mahle pistons in the R might be more robust than the standard Prince ones.

[Andy665]

Robertb said:

Hmm, the ad for this one claims a cambelt change has been done. Maybe they meant chain.

I'd imagine the Mahle pistons in the R might be more robust than the standard Prince ones.

Never any issues with the pistons in any Prince engine.

Prince engine had its issues, just like most modern engines and again, like many modern engines those issues made worse by long life servicing. 100k on a chain, about what was deemed ok for VW / Audi VR engines, tensioners that are very easily replaced.

Worst thing about the Prince engine was the almost unreadable dipstick, almost certainly a factor in engine failures.

[JJJ.]

Robertb said:

WPA said:

itcaptainslow said:

Cambelt weren t these still chain driven? And indeed, the chain was one of the car s foibles!

Correct, these used the Prince engine with well documented failures

Hmm, the ad for this one claims a cambelt change has been done. Maybe they meant chain.

I'd imagine the Mahle pistons in the R might be more robust than the standard Prince ones.

Just had quick look on Google, the common problems with these engines is far worse that I realised.

[MattsCar]

andymadmak said:

A friend had one of these from new and she loved it. I drove it a few times and I thought it was OK, but I did find the ride waaaay too firm and jiggly. I actually got car sick driving it across the Yorkshire moors due to the surface topography and the suspension's tendency to bounce vertically.
The interior was OK too, but not a patch on the equivalent Audi TT in terms of fit and finish. I saw it as a "nearly car" - a little more chassis work and it could have been excellent

Was it the R version that you drove or just the regular 1.6 200 THP?

[mjspencer348]

Andy665 said:

The Alcon brakes are extremely expensive to replace, the roof rails tarnish very badly but its a good looking car and often thought about purchasing one, a lot more expensive than the admittedly less capable 200bhp model though

OEM replacement front disc (each): £598.75. OMG.

[andymadmak]

MattsCar said:

andymadmak said:

A friend had one of these from new and she loved it. I drove it a few times and I thought it was OK, but I did find the ride waaaay too firm and jiggly. I actually got car sick driving it across the Yorkshire moors due to the surface topography and the suspension's tendency to bounce vertically.
The interior was OK too, but not a patch on the equivalent Audi TT in terms of fit and finish. I saw it as a "nearly car" - a little more chassis work and it could have been excellent

Was it the R version that you drove or just the regular 1.6 200 THP?

Ahh, good question. Not sure, but on reflection I would lean towards it having been the 1.6 200 THP.

[Robertb]

Andy665 said:

Robertb said:

Hmm, the ad for this one claims a cambelt change has been done. Maybe they meant chain.

I'd imagine the Mahle pistons in the R might be more robust than the standard Prince ones.

Never any issues with the pistons in any Prince engine.

Prince engine had its issues, just like most modern engines and again, like many modern engines those issues made worse by long life servicing. 100k on a chain, about what was deemed ok for VW / Audi VR engines, tensioners that are very easily replaced.

Worst thing about the Prince engine was the almost unreadable dipstick, almost certainly a factor in engine failures.

Isn't there a problem with the piston rings? We had an R56 Mini with massive oil consumption and smoke, this and the valve stem seals seemed likely suspects.

I do recall the oil-coloured dipstick! At least it had a dipstick, unlike newer engines.