26th May 2008, 16:50
I own a '01 Quicksilver..
I can get 125mph flat out in it.
So all those guys that said about it being slow, or slower than a VTR.
A standard VTR can only hit about 116 flat out. I know because my friend has one and I beat him every time, even when I can't be bothered trying.
Quicksilver has great control and sticks to the road like glue. In a straight line, it would take quite a lot of cars, but on a country road no other car within the price range of £20,000 could keep up with it.
27th May 2008, 13:48
These reviews on small hatches always seem to get outlandish comments where people are defending their pride and joy claiming it is the best car on the road etc etc... The above quote is way over the top when you consider that you could buy all sorts for £20,000 which would be a lot lot faster on any road (e.g. Clio 182, CTR, Impreza WRX).
The 106 Quicksilver is 75bhp as standard so it is not fast no matter how light it is. It will probably handle reasonably well as it is so light, but don't get carried away it is still not going to escape from something with more power on a country lane. Too many drivers assume that because they drive like a loon around lanes that they have the faster car, when actually its simply a case of the other person valuing their car and realising the dangers of driving too fast on twisty roads where anything could be around the bend.
All sorts of cars have been mentioned in these comments such as VTR's, Zetec S' the list goes on. If you are really that fussed, just find out the weight and bhp of each of these cars, and just work out bhp per tonne, as it will tell you pretty accurately which CAR is faster (not driver).
27th May 2008, 16:28
So your saying a 1.4 litre car with 75bhp is quicker than a car with almost identical weight with a 1.6 litre 90bhp or 98bhp engine. And quicker than almost anything below £20000...LOL keep dreaming.
I've driven lawn mowers faster than your quicksilver. A standard 1.6 litre Focus, Astra, Saxo, Clio, Fiesta to name but a few would all beat your little puny engined car with ease.
And see what you can get for less than 20000 these days, cars with between 150/225bhp... would wipe the floor with you!!
21st Oct 2008, 09:25
If you want a car you can eventually tune up, then don't buy a 1.6 which is already putting out enough power to be close to its limit.
If you are really after something tuneable, buy a diesel, most will increase in power 15-25% just from a remap. Take the ZR diesel for example, 99bhp standard, remaps to 135bhp and changes 0-60 from 9.7seconds to about 8.7seconds. Or a Fabia vRS remapped to 175bhp from 130bhp, makes 0-60 go from around 9.2seconds to about 8 dead, possibly even less.
9th Dec 2008, 14:36
WOW, how many people haven't realised that the 106 and the Saxos are the SAME car? So how could the same size engine with the same bhp be faster than the other?
And sorry to disappoint, I mean they are both good cars, the GTI and the VTS being really quite nippy, but best car on the back roads under £20,000 second best handling car EVER!
One word, it's French. I've got a 1.1 106, it's fun, but lets get sensible here, it is great!
But yes great small cars, and for the Quicksilver owner, a good driver in a 1.1 will beat a bad driver in a 1.4 quickly any day, so don't get cocky!
10th Dec 2008, 06:31
They are not the second best handling car ever! I am fed up with people having seen that episode of Top Gear where Clarkson makes that claim, believing it. Also the race drivers with him only said it was more fun, not better handling. It is light with a reasonable chassis, but it is in no way a contender for 'best handling car ever'.
Don't believe me, here is a list of cars which handle better;
- Lotus Elise
- Honda Integra
- Renault Megane R26
- Ariel Atom
- Clio 182/172
- Nissan GTR
- Ferrari F-430
- Mazda MX5
- Honda S2000
- Ford Puma
And pretty much every other Hot Hatch about at the moment or made since the 106gti (and some before). The only reason it was said in that programme was to give the feature a dramatic twist (so he could say 'on that bombshell' or something similar). The GTI might be a lot of fun to drive and handle pretty well, but could everyone stop saying it's the best handling or second best etc car ever.
2nd Mar 2009, 05:21
French cars are crap - always breaking down and falling apart, as I have owned a few 5 turbos and a 206. Stay away from them. Slow bits of crap. Hondas are the most reliable cars, never go wrong and will beat any french car.
4th Jun 2009, 04:55
OK I came on this site to try and find something out... but I've seen some crazy comments and I don't know too much!
I currently drive a 1997 Fiesta mk4 1.25 Zetec, but I've been offered a 2000 106 1.4 Quicksilver for a relatively good price.
Can anyone tell me whether it is worth changing my car? I don't know a lot about the Quicksilver, which is why I am asking.
4th Nov 2009, 18:34
This says it all.. the 106 is great..
6th Nov 2009, 08:05
I would take that with a pinch of salt, it is a programme made for entertainment not facts.
Anyone who seriously rates the 106 over the Lotus Elise in terms of handling is only trying to be controversial. Yes it's light and chuckable and handles well, but it's only dealing with 120bhp, not the hundreds most of those cars are putting through the wheels.
6th Apr 2010, 14:04
This should settle the argument between the Peugeot 106 Quicksilver 1.4 and the Saxo VTS. They may be very similar, if not identical, in design, size, weight and performance, but it all boils down to the ability of the racer, at the end of the day...
21st May 2010, 11:34
My Quicksilver is faster than a VTS, VTR, GTi and Rallye! Only cos I've got the 206 GTi engine :P.
13th Sep 2010, 19:37
Quicksilvers would smoke a VTR with a few little mods!
Mines running a 4-2-1 stainless manifold, Raceland induction kit, Pugsport exhaust, VTR intake and injectors and upgraded cams!
Running 108 bhp with more mods to come!
The amount of VTR's that I've left behind is unreal, 106's are great fun!
14th Sep 2010, 08:18
A 106 Quicksilver is a slow car and not even powerful for a 1.4 at 75 BHP. Why do people try to say lower models in the range are faster than the higher spec models, for example the Quicksilver being faster than the VTR/VTS as this is rubbish. If you did the same mods to the other two they'd still be as much faster than they were as standard! If you want a quick car why start with a piddly powered Quicksilver that needs loads of money spending on it to even make it barely a warm hatch? Surely it would be more sensible if you like Saxo s /106s to get the faster models like the GTI/VTS in the first place?
As said above a Fiesta 1.25 is as fast as a Quicksilver and is a smaller engine. The Quicksilver hardly pushes any boundaries in power to weight/per litre etc.