Peugeot 407 1.6 hdi - any good?
Discussion
Hi guys,
I'm commuting about 30,000 miles a year present (140 mile daily commute - 95% motorway), and I'm currently using a mk2 1.2 Punto to do it. To be fair the Punto's been reliable and fairly economical - an actual 42mpg at 80 (it has tall gearing for a supermini which helps).
I've decided to go for something abit more suitable for a long commute now though, and the 407's look a decent buy. The 1.6 (110bhp) and 2.0 (136bhp) hdi's both seem to go for similar money (budget of around £4000 gets a 50,000 miler), but I'm guessing the 1.6hdi would be more economical at motorway speeds? Or would the six speed box of the 2.0hdi mean this isn't the case?
The reviews all seem to be pretty good, but has anybody owned/driven a 407 that could give some opinions?
Thanks
I'm commuting about 30,000 miles a year present (140 mile daily commute - 95% motorway), and I'm currently using a mk2 1.2 Punto to do it. To be fair the Punto's been reliable and fairly economical - an actual 42mpg at 80 (it has tall gearing for a supermini which helps).
I've decided to go for something abit more suitable for a long commute now though, and the 407's look a decent buy. The 1.6 (110bhp) and 2.0 (136bhp) hdi's both seem to go for similar money (budget of around £4000 gets a 50,000 miler), but I'm guessing the 1.6hdi would be more economical at motorway speeds? Or would the six speed box of the 2.0hdi mean this isn't the case?
The reviews all seem to be pretty good, but has anybody owned/driven a 407 that could give some opinions?
Thanks
No idea about Peugeot economy but here's what I know regarding Skoda's. My current demonstrator is an Octavia 1.6TDi 105PS and I borrowed the service managers 2.0TDI 140PS and got pretty much the same economy. Took my 105 to Scotland for a few days last weekend and at a cruise controlled 80/85 doesn't return much more than 55MPG with two blokes, mountainbikes and clothes for 4 days in the car. I'd suspect at 70 it'd be pretty good but the smaller engines do rev quite high at high speed so the 2.0 could be just as good.
I had the 2.0 sport for 18 months, on the motorway it was fine, but quite agricultural around town. The seats were appaulling as there was a distinct lack of lower back support.
Colleagues have the 1.6 and they are astoundingly slow - nearer 20 seconds to 60, with the same mpg as the 2.0.
There are much better cars out there..
Colleagues have the 1.6 and they are astoundingly slow - nearer 20 seconds to 60, with the same mpg as the 2.0.
There are much better cars out there..
1.6l for motorway? Dont you think the bigger the cubic capacity, the better the fuel econmy & durability, when used extensively on motorways? I would go for a bigger engine than the 1.6 for a high way car, if i were you.
I dont know about your side, but over here in Nigeria, people prefer Peugeot 406 to 407, due to its (406) rugged design. Most also claimed that 406 handled better than 407 on high speed on highway.
I own Peugeot 505 & 605, all V6. And i can tell you, they are amazing cars, especially the 505 V6. We dont drive Diesel Peugeots in Nigeria. Though, i have seen very few imported 406 hdi etc.
Ikenna.
I dont know about your side, but over here in Nigeria, people prefer Peugeot 406 to 407, due to its (406) rugged design. Most also claimed that 406 handled better than 407 on high speed on highway.
I own Peugeot 505 & 605, all V6. And i can tell you, they are amazing cars, especially the 505 V6. We dont drive Diesel Peugeots in Nigeria. Though, i have seen very few imported 406 hdi etc.
Ikenna.
If it's (the 1.6 that is) basically the same engine as in the 307 then they are utter s
te and very unreliable according my garage owning friend.
My wife has a 307 1.6 HDi which was cheap enough for it not to matter if it goes bang and it was over my protestations. He laughed when I told him my wife had bought it and regaled me with the repair costs of the numerous failures they've seen. Get the 2.0.
ETA http://www.dieselbob.co.uk/goodbad.aspx Bottom of the page. And even if you fit a new turbo, the labour required by Pug to do the job properly runs to a couple of k and pug will still not guarantee that it won't quickly happen again.
te and very unreliable according my garage owning friend. My wife has a 307 1.6 HDi which was cheap enough for it not to matter if it goes bang and it was over my protestations. He laughed when I told him my wife had bought it and regaled me with the repair costs of the numerous failures they've seen. Get the 2.0.
ETA http://www.dieselbob.co.uk/goodbad.aspx Bottom of the page. And even if you fit a new turbo, the labour required by Pug to do the job properly runs to a couple of k and pug will still not guarantee that it won't quickly happen again.
Edited by rhinochopig on Sunday 6th November 20:39
I have a Citroen C4 1.6 Hdi (110 BHP), same engine. I've had absolutely no problems with this engine and it has been the most reliable car that I have owned and this is after owning a Skoda Octavia 2.0 PD TDi which I had a number of reliablity issues with. Also this engine is used in a number of other cars e.g Ford, Volvo, Mazda and BMW. I regularly achieve 650 - 700 miles from a tank of fuel. It sits nicely on the m/way where most of my journey is and is a very quiet engine even when cold compared to my old Skoda PD engine which was very agricultural. As for performance it isn't going to set your hair on fire, but thats not why I bought. It has decent torque low down and comes with loads of toys as standard.
from this site:
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/
the 1.6 on average pulls back 44mpg
the 2.0 on average pulls back 38mpg
both have fairly sizable data to back up the numbers, so i'd treat these as the real mpg numbers over any manufacturers or review sites'
http://www.spritmonitor.de/en/
the 1.6 on average pulls back 44mpg
the 2.0 on average pulls back 38mpg
both have fairly sizable data to back up the numbers, so i'd treat these as the real mpg numbers over any manufacturers or review sites'
Edited by Efbe on Sunday 6th November 20:25
Roadrunner23 said:
I have a Citroen C4 1.6 Hdi (110 BHP), same engine. I've had absolutely no problems with this engine and it has been the most reliable car that I have owned and this is after owning a Skoda Octavia 2.0 PD TDi which I had a number of reliablity issues with. Also this engine is used in a number of other cars e.g Ford, Volvo, Mazda and BMW. I regularly achieve 650 - 700 miles from a tank of fuel. It sits nicely on the m/way where most of my journey is and is a very quiet engine even when cold compared to my old Skoda PD engine which was very agricultural. As for performance it isn't going to set your hair on fire, but thats not why I bought. It has decent torque low down and comes with loads of toys as standard.
Which BMW is it used in?I think I have the same 2.0 engine in my CMAX - I tried the Ford version of a 1.6 and it was woeful, I'd hate to have it on the motorway.
With the 2.0 (maybe the way it's geared actually) you can sit in 6th at 70 and stamp for overtakes without any problems. It's not Ferrari acceleration, but it'll get you past things easily. I can't imagine the same thing happening with the 1.6
ETA - if I drive between 60 and 70 it'll see over 55 to the gallon, maybe 60 depending on the gradients
With the 2.0 (maybe the way it's geared actually) you can sit in 6th at 70 and stamp for overtakes without any problems. It's not Ferrari acceleration, but it'll get you past things easily. I can't imagine the same thing happening with the 1.6
ETA - if I drive between 60 and 70 it'll see over 55 to the gallon, maybe 60 depending on the gradients
I've got the 1.6 HDi (110) in a Pug 207 and it's nippy enough for a little car like that, but it's the same engine in my brother's 307 and it's awfully slow in comparison. Got to be at least a 2.0 in a 407 I'd have thought.
Have to agree with a previous poster - local inde garage say lots of problems with these units.
Have to agree with a previous poster - local inde garage say lots of problems with these units.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff