RE: Peugeot 205 GTI: PH Used Buying Guide
Discussion
Jex said:
I seem to recall that the 1.9s had to have special tyres because the different alloys didn't fit properly in the wheel arches, or am I mis-speaking?
They had 185/55-15s. Rather more rare (and expensive) than the more common 195/50-15s, but don't know if there was a special reason behind it....Always amuses me when others compare it to something newer (and inevitably DIESEL!). I drive a 3.0 Diesel estate tank every day: it is merely an appliance, perfectly suited to the job, and my Pablo (1.9 GTi) won't see which way it went if I put the foot down in it (same for my old 944 Cabriolet as well - yes, I have on occasion amused myself with the ways of progress, that my diesel dog carrier is quicker than my Porsche!). But like the old saying goes: 'it is better to drive/ride a slow car/bike fast, than a fast one slow, and EVERY time I take out the Puggo, it is a blast. EVERY roundabout and back lane just makes me giggle, as it is simply so easy to do. Try that - not just in a 2.0 diesel estate, but ANY modern hot hatch from a Fiesta ST to a Type-R, and you simply won't get anywhere near as much of a laugh, as you are just nowhere near their limits when driving on normal, public roads. They may well be 50% faster now, but you need to push them 50% more to get the same thrills....... and see how long your license lasts in that case, if you're giving it large every time you had to Tesco! I'm not looking at them in 'rose-tinted glasses', I LOVE modern cars too and how advanced their capabilities are. But it is simply impossible to get anywhere near exploiting their capabilities on modern jammed up and gatso'd up roads, so I'll be keeping Pablo for another while yet and keep making excuses to run to the shop for milk: couldn't afford one when I was a brat of a 17 year old back in 1989....... I guess there's one positive thing to come out of getting old! 
alfapork said:
Dale487 said:
You didn't mention that cracking of the body shell along the rainwater gutter seam can be a problem to look for.
IIRC it doesn't actually crack the metal on the rainwater gutter. There is seam sealer there and that cracks, not the metal. Cosmetic but water can get in if not attended to.
Arsecati said:
Always amuses me when others compare it to something newer (and inevitably DIESEL!). I drive a 3.0 Diesel estate tank every day: it is merely an appliance, perfectly suited to the job, and my Pablo (1.9 GTi) won't see which way it went if I put the foot down in it (same for my old 944 Cabriolet as well - yes, I have on occasion amused myself with the ways of progress, that my diesel dog carrier is quicker than my Porsche!). But like the old saying goes: 'it is better to drive/ride a slow car/bike fast, than a fast one slow, and EVERY time I take out the Puggo, it is a blast. EVERY roundabout and back lane just makes me giggle, as it is simply so easy to do. Try that - not just in a 2.0 diesel estate, but ANY modern hot hatch from a Fiesta ST to a Type-R, and you simply won't get anywhere near as much of a laugh, as you are just nowhere near their limits when driving on normal, public roads. They may well be 50% faster now, but you need to push them 50% more to get the same thrills....... and see how long your license lasts in that case, if you're giving it large every time you had to Tesco! I'm not looking at them in 'rose-tinted glasses', I LOVE modern cars too and how advanced their capabilities are. But it is simply impossible to get anywhere near exploiting their capabilities on modern jammed up and gatso'd up roads, so I'll be keeping Pablo for another while yet and keep making excuses to run to the shop for milk: couldn't afford one when I was a brat of a 17 year old back in 1989....... I guess there's one positive thing to come out of getting old!
I agree, if you look at a car as an appliance - a modern car wins hands down on every measurable criteria. But an older car is more likely to be more fun at any speed (something that a tape measure & stop watch won't record).As its only sensible for me to have one car, I'll stick with my Leon FR but I'd love to have my first car (106 Quicksilver or better upgrade to a Rallye) tucked away for high days & holidays.
MrScrot said:
alfapork said:
Dale487 said:
You didn't mention that cracking of the body shell along the rainwater gutter seam can be a problem to look for.
IIRC it doesn't actually crack the metal on the rainwater gutter. There is seam sealer there and that cracks, not the metal. Cosmetic but water can get in if not attended to.No mention of the electrics being an absolute pile of garbage. My 1.6 would moderately often just conk out while driving, refuse to start, the lights might not work, etc..
The blocks were also prone to leaking the water into the oil.
I think mine was the worst car I've ever owned, which surprised me at the time because it replaced a 205 diesel, which I still think may have been the best car I've ever owned.
The blocks were also prone to leaking the water into the oil.
I think mine was the worst car I've ever owned, which surprised me at the time because it replaced a 205 diesel, which I still think may have been the best car I've ever owned.
Turbobanana said:
austinsmirk said:
I remember them only too well. amazing at the time and a young drivers dream. but how times have changed- 0-60 in 7.8- Any generic 2.0 D is beating that these days !!
Didn't think it would be long before this got trotted out, again. PH forums seem incapable of viewing anything within the context of its time: in the early eighties, these were bang on the money performance-wise, and handling was better than most. Granted, viewed against 2018 levels of performance, safety and technology they are vintage, but that's like saying an early eighties mobile phone is "a bit basic" because it can't do what an iPhone does.Will people in 30 years' time be mocking the danger and performance of fossil-fuelled cars against eerily silent, safe electric ones?
There are a lot of dashboard thumpers and strokers on here
s m said:
Turbobanana said:
austinsmirk said:
I remember them only too well. amazing at the time and a young drivers dream. but how times have changed- 0-60 in 7.8- Any generic 2.0 D is beating that these days !!
Didn't think it would be long before this got trotted out, again. PH forums seem incapable of viewing anything within the context of its time: in the early eighties, these were bang on the money performance-wise, and handling was better than most. Granted, viewed against 2018 levels of performance, safety and technology they are vintage, but that's like saying an early eighties mobile phone is "a bit basic" because it can't do what an iPhone does.Will people in 30 years' time be mocking the danger and performance of fossil-fuelled cars against eerily silent, safe electric ones?
There are a lot of dashboard thumpers and strokers on here
Dale487 said:
MrScrot said:
alfapork said:
Dale487 said:
You didn't mention that cracking of the body shell along the rainwater gutter seam can be a problem to look for.
IIRC it doesn't actually crack the metal on the rainwater gutter. There is seam sealer there and that cracks, not the metal. Cosmetic but water can get in if not attended to.As for my opinion of the car, I think they are excellent. This is my third 205, before I had a 5 door Mardi Gras Petrol, then a 1.6 CTi and finally a 1.6 GTi.
The 5 door didn't have the power of the GTi obviously, but the lighter engine made for some fun handling around town. It was comfortable, reliable and more usable than the GTi and CTi. The clutch was lighter than its perfomance brothers, and it had decent mpg. I regret getting rid of that car.
The CTi would have been good if it hadn't been thrashed by the previous 10 owners. The condition of these cars really are indicative of how much you will enjoy ownership. That could be stated for a lot of cars, but for the CTi it is really important to get one in decent condition. The vinyl roof adds that extra level of maintenance that can require a lot patience. In terms of performance, it's not quite on par with the GTi. The convertible, with its softer suspension, floats around corners rather than tracks onto them, though it still feels planted. But with the roof down you do get that extra level of drama that makes it worth all the compromises.
The GTi drinks petrol, the clutch is not at all good for traffic, and the lack of power steering makes parking bay manoeuvres a labour. Find a decent back road however it all makes sense. It's the funnest car I've driven.
When buying it's paramount to make sure there is no major corrosion, and that the rear beam is in serviceable condition. These will cause real headaches if you are unlucky enough to buy a 205 with these issues. I was with my CTi.
MrScrot said:
alfapork said:
Dale487 said:
You didn't mention that cracking of the body shell along the rainwater gutter seam can be a problem to look for.
IIRC it doesn't actually crack the metal on the rainwater gutter. There is seam sealer there and that cracks, not the metal. Cosmetic but water can get in if not attended to.If that's correct, it might be a case of cutting it off and re-sealing it . A bit like your bath tub...
Given how simple that are, there can't be £20k+ of labour and parts in making a £6k a £30k Shirley? Or do buyers want silly low mileages for that?
I remember back-in-the-day a friend of a friend was renowned for putting his backwards through a hedge, he 'simply' bought the nearest 1.0 version and swap over the drive train and interior and away he went.
I remember back-in-the-day a friend of a friend was renowned for putting his backwards through a hedge, he 'simply' bought the nearest 1.0 version and swap over the drive train and interior and away he went.
Arsecati said:
Always amuses me when others compare it to something newer (and inevitably DIESEL!). I drive a 3.0 Diesel estate tank every day: it is merely an appliance, perfectly suited to the job, and my Pablo (1.9 GTi) won't see which way it went if I put the foot down in it (same for my old 944 Cabriolet as well - yes, I have on occasion amused myself with the ways of progress, that my diesel dog carrier is quicker than my Porsche!). But like the old saying goes: 'it is better to drive/ride a slow car/bike fast, than a fast one slow, and EVERY time I take out the Puggo, it is a blast. EVERY roundabout and back lane just makes me giggle, as it is simply so easy to do. Try that - not just in a 2.0 diesel estate, but ANY modern hot hatch from a Fiesta ST to a Type-R, and you simply won't get anywhere near as much of a laugh, as you are just nowhere near their limits when driving on normal, public roads. They may well be 50% faster now, but you need to push them 50% more to get the same thrills....... and see how long your license lasts in that case, if you're giving it large every time you had to Tesco! I'm not looking at them in 'rose-tinted glasses', I LOVE modern cars too and how advanced their capabilities are. But it is simply impossible to get anywhere near exploiting their capabilities on modern jammed up and gatso'd up roads, so I'll be keeping Pablo for another while yet and keep making excuses to run to the shop for milk: couldn't afford one when I was a brat of a 17 year old back in 1989....... I guess there's one positive thing to come out of getting old!
I agree. I have a 17 plate 220d m sport Gran Tourer and it is ruthlessly efficient but hopelessly uninteresting to drive. It is the family bus. I schlepp around in an old E46 320cd m sport. Being rwd and I suspect mapped I find it mildly entertaining but ultimately it is also a tool for my commuting. I have just sold a well sorted 320bhp 9-5 Aero with quaife that was really fun but ultimately if pushed rather anti-social at the point it became such. I have just bought a CB650F 2018 for giggles because as anyone knows............any bike is fun at any speed. Unlike a lot of cars.markcoznottz said:
Like driving a tin can. Great drivers car, like a go cart. Pretty quick as well, but that's that's light weight fir you. If they were any lighter they would float away.
My mum had a 1.9 back in the day, we all laughed when she shut the door, it echoed!We didn’t laugh after she belted off up the road like a rocket!
One drive and it went back to the dealership, ‘too fast for me’ was the reason - best strap line for an advert ever😀
P-Jay said:
Given how simple that are, there can't be £20k+ of labour and parts in making a £6k a £30k Shirley? Or do buyers want silly low mileages for that?
I remember back-in-the-day a friend of a friend was renowned for putting his backwards through a hedge, he 'simply' bought the nearest 1.0 version and swap over the drive train and interior and away he went.
He did well to not destroy the rear tyres on the arches. The none GTI rear quarter has a different much lower profile. I remember back-in-the-day a friend of a friend was renowned for putting his backwards through a hedge, he 'simply' bought the nearest 1.0 version and swap over the drive train and interior and away he went.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff