106 vs Saxo 1.1 engine vs Parkers Guide accuracy!
Discussion
Hi All,
I'm stuck dealing with the fallout out my gf writing off her 106 the other week and sourcing a replacement. She pretty much is set on another 106, wants a 1.1 for the economy/low tax/low insurance (120mile round trip to uni in Northampton). I'm saying look at Saxos as well as they're the same bloody thing, but then she throws up the crap that is Parkers guide Technical data, according to which her Look 2 has the following figures:
CC/Cyl BHP MPH 0-60 MPG IG
1124/4 60 102 14.9 42 3
A Saxo East Coast:
CC/Cyl BHP MPH 0-60 MPG IG
1124/4 60 101 12.4 43 4
So, Saxo is quicker for same engine power(?), slightly better mpg, and one IG higher which I don't think will make much of a difference given her dubious driving record as I can guarantee her premium won't be going down anytime soon!
There's a great looking low mileage Saxo not too far away, but the stubborn mare won't consider it. Other than giving her the lobotomy she needs, can anyone cast doubt on the figures from Parkers to help persuade her or offer some cunningly persuasive advice?
Cheers,
Rob
I'm stuck dealing with the fallout out my gf writing off her 106 the other week and sourcing a replacement. She pretty much is set on another 106, wants a 1.1 for the economy/low tax/low insurance (120mile round trip to uni in Northampton). I'm saying look at Saxos as well as they're the same bloody thing, but then she throws up the crap that is Parkers guide Technical data, according to which her Look 2 has the following figures:
CC/Cyl BHP MPH 0-60 MPG IG
1124/4 60 102 14.9 42 3
A Saxo East Coast:
CC/Cyl BHP MPH 0-60 MPG IG
1124/4 60 101 12.4 43 4
So, Saxo is quicker for same engine power(?), slightly better mpg, and one IG higher which I don't think will make much of a difference given her dubious driving record as I can guarantee her premium won't be going down anytime soon!
There's a great looking low mileage Saxo not too far away, but the stubborn mare won't consider it. Other than giving her the lobotomy she needs, can anyone cast doubt on the figures from Parkers to help persuade her or offer some cunningly persuasive advice?
Cheers,
Rob
Xaero said:
They are the same cars, but peugeot put full tank of petrol and weighted the car a bit to make it slower for the lower insurance group, so I heard...
Indeed. They did this with the 106 GTI too, which on paper against the Saxo VTS is slower. Pug run their performance tests with a passenger, full tank of fuel and luggage in the boot, which gets them slightly lower performance figures, and hence a lower insurance grouping, meaning more youngsters will buy their cars.
Quite a clever marketing ploy - the 1.1 saxo and 106 are the same cars. Tell your GF, if you go to a dealer to buy and spare parts, they come in a bag with both the Peugeot and Citroen logo, and all the suspension/engine...well, all mechanical parts really are interchangeable between the cars.
Edited by timbob on Sunday 11th February 14:07
Thanks guys, that's very naughty of Peugeot of course!
Anyway, due to a combination of needing a car pronto and me not being willing to drive her hundreds of miles all over the country, she picked up her new Saxo yesterday. 97 P 1.1 SX - feel the force! Only downside is that it's missing PAS but she seems to be coping just with that. Personally I think the interior is nicer than the 106s but the exterior is a bit blander, other than that I just don't care
Cheers,
Rob
Anyway, due to a combination of needing a car pronto and me not being willing to drive her hundreds of miles all over the country, she picked up her new Saxo yesterday. 97 P 1.1 SX - feel the force! Only downside is that it's missing PAS but she seems to be coping just with that. Personally I think the interior is nicer than the 106s but the exterior is a bit blander, other than that I just don't care
Cheers,
Rob
timbob said:
Xaero said:
They are the same cars, but peugeot put full tank of petrol and weighted the car a bit to make it slower for the lower insurance group, so I heard...
Indeed. They did this with the 106 GTI too, which on paper against the Saxo VTS is slower. Pug run their performance tests with a passenger, full tank of fuel and luggage in the boot, which gets them slightly lower performance figures, and hence a lower insurance grouping, meaning more youngsters will buy their cars.
Edited by timbob on Sunday 11th February 14:07
Also (apparently) they made 2nd gear longer thus not need to change before 60.
simes205 said:
timbob said:
Xaero said:
They are the same cars, but peugeot put full tank of petrol and weighted the car a bit to make it slower for the lower insurance group, so I heard...
Indeed. They did this with the 106 GTI too, which on paper against the Saxo VTS is slower. Pug run their performance tests with a passenger, full tank of fuel and luggage in the boot, which gets them slightly lower performance figures, and hence a lower insurance grouping, meaning more youngsters will buy their cars.
Edited by timbob on Sunday 11th February 14:07
Also (apparently) they made 2nd gear longer thus not need to change before 60.
Hmm, my phase two 106 bounces at around 55mph.
Still more fun than the fatty Saxo!
simes205 said:
timbob said:
Xaero said:
They are the same cars, but peugeot put full tank of petrol and weighted the car a bit to make it slower for the lower insurance group, so I heard...
Indeed. They did this with the 106 GTI too, which on paper against the Saxo VTS is slower. Pug run their performance tests with a passenger, full tank of fuel and luggage in the boot, which gets them slightly lower performance figures, and hence a lower insurance grouping, meaning more youngsters will buy their cars.
Edited by timbob on Sunday 11th February 14:07
Also (apparently) they made 2nd gear longer thus not need to change before 60.
I thought they were trying to make the car slower?
Gassing Station | French Bred | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff