Suspension sinks on Sundays! C5 X7 that works hard + 206 GTi HDi (and 406 Coupe and 306 HDi). - MattBLancs

[MattBLancs]

Oooh! That looks nasty Matt, have you reached the "I've come this far............" stage or are dead horses and whips the order of the day?

I follow my dad's "end it or mend it" strategy generally!
Also a hugely sentimental silly sod about these "tin boxes", so will persevere where others would likely see sense and cut their losses!

[Rp0thejester]

If everyone cut their loses and run, there would be no classic car left on the planet. Future classics are hard to predict. Maybe yours is a future classic.

[mickthemaverick]

Glad to hear that Matt, I've always been a "I've come this far......." merchant though it hasn't always worked out!! I kept my Celica convertible on the road for 22 years after buying an MOT failure in the first place, but even I gave up when the B pillars became unsalvageable with no spares to be found anywhere. I swapped it for my Xedos 9 in the end and the chap that took it refabricated an entire chassis in his workshop and sold it on 9 months later!!

MTMO

[MattBLancs]

I couldn't tell what those photos were of. But practice makes perfect. Or would it be simpler to remove and fit a new part?

No problem, they are pretty close up!

(A)
The bit the MOT man wasn't happy with. Inboard of the sill, just in front of the left rear wheel.

From parts Asia site

(B)
The long length that I uncovered, again inboard of the sill. Effectively it's the edge of the floor itself. Not sure this is a separate part, can't find it as such on the parts Asia site.

[MattBLancs]

(C)
The bit near the anti roll bar

I think it's this bit? / this is what behind the inner wing that's part of the body shell

From parts Asia site

[MattBLancs]

Hypothetical question / thinking aloud / bunch of waffle:
Currently I've:
a young family,
A 3 door 206 that's been good but needs work and ultimately is a little small for family use,
A big C5 estate that does the family car job well, but is pretty big, especially for my wife to drive, though she has done a fair few times recently.
And a** 406 Coupe that was surprisingly good a family duties but recently found to be full of crusty brown fringed holes...

** ignore the other one with the engine out for the moment.


Think I'm potentially looking for another car.

I've searched for "small estates" (and get results such as the Skoda Octavia which sure isn't my definition of small!)

I think the answer is a 207 SW, is there anything else I ought to be considering? Have a preference to "stick with what I know" so something other than a Peugeot / Citroen would need to be pretty compelling to tempt me.

I know Jim is suited with his C3 Picasso (so will offer that as a consideration. Doesn't "do it" for me and just can't put my finger on why! Sorry Jim! I'll see what Sarah thinks)

On the 207, I've seen HustyXantia's informative post viewtopic.php?t=74182 with good info.
I've also seen this: viewtopic.php?t=53247 with lots of negatives against what would have been my engine choice!
I'm keen not to have "a plodder" so plenty of power is preferred. The 206 when in good health is a little rocket (GTi HDI spec: 110bhp and not much weight!)

Plus points of the 207 SW:
Panoramic glass sunroof available - makes such a difference to my C5, think I'd seek this out again here
Rear suspension doesn't have the space efficient but fairly short lifespan torsion beam setup (the 206 has been changed twice in our ownership)

I've a preference for older cars (so would consider 306 estate and possibly 206 SW but generally they are getting long in the tooth and hence likelihood of picking up another welding project seem high!)

Massive aversion to all things SUV, so Peugeot 2008 etc not appealing.


I would go diesel, but a 1.6 DV6 (of unknown history) would be a concern. More generally, the current policy of painting diesel engines generally as "the bogey man" suggests going that route may not be best idea.

Any and all thoughts welcome!

[MattBLancs]

Hmmm, it seems a "207 SW RC" would fit the bill, though seems so rare that it likely wasn't sold in the UK.

[CitroJim]

I know the C3 Picasso is not everybody's cup of tea Matt... I'd say they're an acquired taste but immensely family practical and brilliant when you acquire that taste Yes, the DV6 can, especially if mated to an Adblue tank, be a bit of 'fun' but against that, it's a very sweet engine that purrs like no other diesel except other PSA diesels... I'm shocked at how some modern diesels still sound like bags of spanners.

The DV6 seems to need a lot of TLC and understanding to keep it happy.

And as for diesels being a bogeyman, I think with a fully functional DPF and an Adblue system they can be very clean. Mine runs with a spotless tail pipe and I've never seen as much as a puff of smoke from it. I'd say it was squeaky-clean.

Panoramic sunroofs are brilliant. I love mine and so does my granddaughter... Her mum loves the practicality of my Picasso too compared to her Renault Clio Hybrid...

Maybe if the C3 Picasso is not for you, how about a C4 Picasso? They don't look quite so quirky but do have more complexity in some areas...

But yes, a 207SW ticks a lot of boxes and definitely worth a look. I like them and if you don't need what is essentially a posh van, as I do, it could be a winner, especially with a panoramic sunroof

[MattBLancs]

Parkers website appears to be gibberish,

Petrol engines

The pick of the petrols is in fact the 1.4-litre available with 75bhp or 90bhp. It’s nippy, easy to drive around town and more than capable on the motorway. However it’s short on refinement and becomes strained high in the rev range. The 90bhp version was replaced by a 95bhp 1.4-litre VTi engine in August 2007 and the newer engine offers better performance and improved refinement. Trade-up to the 1.6-litre petrol and you get 110bhp, but no more fun – however on the plus side it doesn’t need to be worked as hard to make fast progress, especially up hills.

From https://www.parkers.co.uk/peugeot/207/review/engines/

So the "pick of the range" is one engine (in a choice of power outputs) that is "short on refinement" and is replaced by a newer engine which "offers better performance and improved refinement" which begs the question on what basis is the earlier engine(s) "the pick" by any sensible metric!?!
Meanwhile a more powerful option is "no more fun" for no specific reason.

Strewth!

[CitroJim]

Strewth!

And to think someone was paid to write that

[MattBLancs]

I know the C3 Picasso is not everybody's cup of tea Matt... I'd say they're an acquired taste but immensely family practical and brilliant when you acquire that taste Yes, the DV6 can, especially if mated to an Adblue tank, be a bit of 'fun' but against that, it's a very sweet engine that purrs like no other diesel except other PSA diesels... I'm shocked at how some modern diesels still sound like bags of spanners.

The DV6 seems to need a lot of TLC and understanding to keep it happy.

And as for diesels being a bogeyman, I think with a fully functional DPF and an Adblue system they can be very clean. Mine runs with a spotless tail pipe and I've never seen as much as a puff of smoke from it. I'd say it was squeaky-clean.

Panoramic sunroofs are brilliant. I love mine and so does my granddaughter... Her mum loves the practicality of my Picasso too compared to her Renault Clio Hybrid...

Maybe if the C3 Picasso is not for you, how about a C4 Picasso? They don't look quite so quirky but do have more complexity in some areas...

But yes, a 207SW ticks a lot of boxes and definitely worth a look. I like them and if you don't need what is essentially a posh van, as I do, it could be a winner, especially with a panoramic sunroof

Thanks Jim,

Yes I love the DV6 (in 16 valve guise - not tried the later 8 valve version but have read it is less rev happy than the 16v which if true would be a shame)

To be clear, I mean that government policy is to portray diesels as evil machines and I expect this narrative to be the underpinning for taxation etc "to encourage us to something cleaner, like electric" - I think this is nonsense and as you say modern diesels are very clean indeed. They give good performance and remarkable economy.

Much like the previous "scrappage schemes" which were portrayed as "ridding us of polluting cars" but in reality were propping up the car industry by driving new car sales. Green washing I think is the term.

Encouraging folks to keep existing cars in good order, reduces the "dust to dust cost" far more, but isn't the government fashion.

[CitroJim]

To be clear, I mean that government policy is to portray diesels as evil machines and I expect this narrative to be the underpinning for taxation etc "to encourage us to something cleaner, like electric" - I think this is nonsense and as you say modern diesels are very clean indeed. They give good performance and remarkable economy.

Much like the previous "scrappage schemes" which were portrayed as "ridding us of polluting cars" but in reality were propping up the car industry by driving new car sales. Green washing I think is the term.

Encouraging folks to keep existing cars in good order, reduces the "dust to dust cost" far more, but isn't the government fashion.

Ahh yes, I understand now Matt... Greenwashing indeed and as always, money talks My/youngest daughter's Pixo came about via the old original 2009 scrappage scheme. Dad let his nice blue Pug 205D go to the scheme and bought the Pixo brand-new at a bargain-basement price. I was initially furious with him but 14 years on it proved to be quite a good move... Pix has turned out to be a good 'un.

My 8V DV6 seems quite revvy and lively although its redline is surprisingly low for a modern diesel... I'm still a newbie with these engines and intrigued by the earlier ones being 16V and the later ones 8V... Seems a bit retrograde on the face of it... I guess there must have been some good rationale behind it..

[MattBLancs]

My 8V DV6 seems quite revvy and lively although its redline is surprisingly low for a modern diesel... I'm still a newbie with these engines and intrigued by the earlier ones being 16V and the later ones 8V... Seems a bit retrograde on the face of it... I guess there must have been some good rationale behind it..

I imagine the conversation was along the lines of

Engineering dept. "We've had another look at the DV6, we think we can get the 16v up to about 140bhp, or take a load of cost of its production by getting a cheaper 8v head to deliver the current 110bhp"

Accountants: "2.0 16v HDi makes 138, go make the DV6 cheaper please"




My HDi experience is of 2.0 HDi 8 valve (in the 306) lovely engine, went very well, but never felt much point taking it much past 3500rpm,
The 1.6 DV6 16v saw 5000 quite often, never known a diesel like it!
More recently I have obviously experienced the Coupe's 2.2 16v HDi, this is remapped so not a fair comparison but it seems both willing to rev and a thumping mid range!

Incidentally, I always thought if criminal that the 110 bhp DW10 never made it into the 306!
The late (306 related) Xsara got it, so there was clearly room for the intercooler in that engine bay!
I've never experienced the 110 bhp DW10 so am unsure of its character but always thought the 306 HDi would be even better with a big more go

[CitroJim]

Yes, I'd go along with the accountant theory for the 8V decision. Sounds scarily accurate to me!

The 110 bhp DW10 is possibly the loveliest of the breed. I had a 110 Xantia and it was superb. I found, given I had much previous experience of the 1.9 and 2.1TD XUD engines in Xantias, the 110 DW10 to be a beautiful combination of both with the stonking low-end torque of the 2.1 and the lively revviness of the 1.9. It was criminal it never made it into the 306. It would have made an awesome car even more awesome.

You can't even say it was because it was not wide enough to accommodate the ML5 gearbox (the BE3 being too marginal on a 110bhp motor) because they found plenty of room for the 6 speed 'box.

[Paul-R]

My 8V DV6 seems quite revvy and lively ...

I must disagree with you on that Jim. Our 8v DV6 pulls strongly from astonishingly low revs. In fact I have to clear the error codes every so often because the (engine?) ECU thinks that the dual mass flywheel needs replacing.

It feels like a much bigger engine really. Ours is the 120 bhp version, maybe yours is the 90bhp or something else?

I'm still a newbie with these engines and intrigued by the earlier ones being 16V and the later ones 8V... Seems a bit retrograde on the face of it... I guess there must have been some good rationale behind it..

There must have been, especially as the later 1.5l version went back to 16v. But I don't care. It's just such a jewel of an engine.