2000 Citroen Saxo Reviews - Page 12 of 19

2000 Citroen Saxo VTR 1.6 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2000
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 1.6 petrol Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.8 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance16000 miles
Previous carCitroen Saxo

Summary:

A great fun, superb looking car

Faults:

Water pump failed at 15,000 miles.

General Comments:

I loved this car. This is the second new Saxo VTR I have owned in 3 years. The first was Persian red and the most recent one was silver.

I found reliability to be excellent. My only niggle was when the windows were wound down half way, they rattled like mad. I had my temperature gauge replaced by my dealer (Lincoln) which improved the reading (although I gather it's nothing to worry about if it runs higher).

I've just bought a Peugeot 206 2.0 HDi at the weekend (cheaper running costs), but already I'm missing the look of those lovely alloy wheels and the way the VTR used to corner. I'm having withdrawal symptoms. The VTR is a seriously fun car - a pleasure to drive.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 13th August, 2001

2000 Citroen Saxo VTS 1.6i 16v from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2000
First year of ownership2001
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 1.6i 16v Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.2 / 10
Distance when acquired4500 miles
Most recent distance10800 miles
Previous carCitroen Saxo

Summary:

Massive fun for drivers who don't take the car's handling for granted

Faults:

Absolutely nothing, although oil seemed to go down quick when thrashing it. I suspected a leak, but this was not the case.

General Comments:

Very fast car, but needs revving hard to get full performance.

A level headed driver is required to drive this hard, but the rewards are high, especially compared to soft cars like a Fiesta Zetec S which forgives mistakes with understeer - safer (?) but boring.

Great handling and grip, but wrong tyres (I suspect this is the biggest reason people say the 106 is slighter better - the Michelin Pilots are terrible, no feel, no grip, I use Goodyear F1, a massive improvement in grip, predictability, wet weather performance, feel,etc. Bin the Michelins).

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 13th July, 2001

16th Sep 2001, 10:47

Not driven a Zetec-S have you...?

I binned my VTS and got one, they may be a bit slower standard, but you can soon remedy that with chip etc. A Zetec-S will run rings around a VTS because of the suspension setup. Also a nice trait the Ford has, is that is doesn't fall to bits and break down every day. Look at the comments on this site, Saxo's are motorised dustbins. How Citroen get away with selling such dross is outrageous.

2000 Citroen Saxo VTS 1.6 16v from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture2000
First year of ownership2000
Most recent year of ownership2001
Engine and transmission 1.6 16v Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.4 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance5500 miles
Previous carVauxhall Nova

Summary:

The most fun you can get for 12000ukp

Faults:

Rattle from the dashboard near the stereo.

Loose wheel arch moulding on the driver's side front.

General Comments:

Absolutely phenomenal handling. I cannot emphasise enough how much fun this car is. It is less relaxing than the Peugeot 106 GTi which I test drove, but when you are in the mood, it is more exciting. Bit hairy in terms of lift-off oversteer if you are clumsy with the throttle mid-bend. If you want it to wag its tail though, it will do so on demand. Understeer is not an issue.

Stunning performance for a 1.6 over 4500rpm. It could maybe use a little more torque, but I am splitting hairs.

The ride and comfort levels are also good for such a small car on 15" wheels and tyre noise is surprisingly low.

My only gripes would be the vibration through the throttle pedal at 3000-3250rpm, and the dashboard rattle.

The dealer is quite helpful and seems to make an effort to resolve the rattle, but so far has failed on 3 attempts. The pedal vibration (which I don't notice now) is apparently common to all VTS Saxos.

Incidentally, I got mine, brand new, for under £10000. Simply take a quote from a European dealer into your local Citroen shop and they will fold after about 20 minutes. I was amazed, I was only trying my luck! My dealer is Citroen London West.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 27th April, 2001

24th Oct 2001, 04:05

More fun can be had for less than 12,000. In fact 10,000 GBP. This comes in the form of a Fiesta Zetec-S. The handling on the Fiesta is far superior to the VTR/VTS. I have test driven both and they pale in comparison. Although the build quality is far from first class on both makes, the Fiesta seems a lot more resilient to thrashing and every day use. The Zetec engine is phenomenal and although on paper is marginally slower than the VTS, as the engine wears in nicely, it will begin to generate more torque and power. The 0-60 on my Zetec-S is now around 9 seconds and it is just getting quicker.

The spec on the fiesta is also much better. The cabin is light and stylish where as the Saxo is bland and cramped. In all the Zetec-S is far superior in almost every way and I highly recommend getting one.

The dealers are not very good, but neither are Citroens! Plus if you complain enough you find that the ultimate service that you get is top notch and they treat you very well, provided you are aggressive enough!

24th Jun 2002, 13:01

I guess you were traveling downhill with a tail wind to get o-60 at 9 seconds from a zetec S. If ford had used the 1.8ltr engine then the two would have been comparable.

30th Sep 2002, 09:31

I had a VTS, is quick and handles well, that's about the plus points for it, poor build, rubbish brakes, insurance is stupid for such a small car, now have a Ford Fiesta Zetec-s, not as quick, but cheaper to insure and stops and handles better and more reliable and more toys, the engine can take repeated thrashings unlike the VTS engine.

5th Nov 2005, 09:26

Rover 214? Well thanks for making me laugh anyway!

6th Nov 2007, 19:09

That's right, Rover 214's are pretty nippy you know. It may only be a Rover, but they have some serious go in them. You have to rev the hell out of them to get the use out of them, and once rev'd to 6'5-7k, changing gear means you're right back in to the power band.

And as for VTRs, I've seen them beat Zetec Ss all the time. VTSs wouldn't even have to try.

7th Nov 2007, 12:08

With low profile tyres like the S the VTR would probably match it in the handling department. Performance wise, there is no difference that I can see, and we are talking 20 - 100mph, the speeds we raced from and too. How do I know? I have done it on a dual carraige way against a friend. Won't say if I was driving a VTR or a Zetec S! :)

Average review marks: 6.8 / 10, based on 77 reviews