3rd Aug 2005, 12:51

I've had my 1 year old 180 for a month now, having bought it at a dealer for £6k less than the new price, and for the money (and having test driven the opposition) I believe I made the right choice. In comparison to it's rivals here's why:

Clio 172/182 - Smaller than the Pug with awful build quality, worse depreciation and higher insurance quotes.

Civic Type R - Stupidly high used prices at dealers (although admittedly lower depreciation), poor steering (worse than the 180), poor equipment levels, higher insurance quotes, horror stories about quality of paint work and interior trim.

Mini Cooper S - Smaller, stupidly high used prices, you look like an estate agent in one (especially in London).

Having previously owned a 1.9 205 Gti, (no modern GTi will ever compare for exhiliration) and a 137bhp 206 Gti (pretty good when it first came out in '99) I'm bit of a Pug fan, but I'll admit that the 180 isn't a classic. However, it does everything well, it's extremely comfortable and well equipped, it looks great, it's quick and very capable, it's pretty well built and it's cheap on the used market.

You need to spend a while driving this car, but once you've got some miles under your belt, you learn how to use it's power. The variable valve timing isn't as raucous as a VTEC (I use my Dad's S2000 regularly) but it's still a great adrenalin boost.

So, not a raw Gti in the 205 mould, but an under-rated fast hatch. If you go to The Times website and check out the reviews, you'll find that Jeremy Clarkson agrees too.

30th Jan 2006, 12:59

I own a 206 gti 180 and recorded its time to 60 and got 6.3 which beats a civic.

23rd Feb 2006, 04:34

7.1 recorded which is with two passengers, luggage and a full tank as all Peugeot performance tests are done. Handling is not crap either (have you even driven it) a very underrated car in my opinion.

23rd Feb 2006, 15:40

Yes I have driven it and found it to be sloppy and underpowered.

27th Mar 2006, 19:17

Pug 180s are slow. Look at the paper times. The MG is so much quicker.

29th Mar 2006, 14:07

What are you talking about?

0 - 60 is 0 - 60 no matter how you get there. If you're smoked at some highway on ramp are you seriously going to tell your passenger 'well, he was redlining every gear while I was doing the 'RPM' thing", so obviously I have the faster time?


30th Mar 2006, 03:07

Oh dear, if I redlined my 4motion in every gear it would be under 6 seconds 0-62, so that means it's quicker than a r32? No it's not, if you redlined a Civic it would be faster than your redlined attempt of the 206, you with me now?

As opposed to my golf 0-62 in 7.1 at 4000 rpm. That is what revs the needle went to before a gear change. If you redline your car all the time, looks good at Southend I suppose until it blows up.. hope this helps.

6th Apr 2006, 05:30

Some good points there, but having to drop a car down into 2nd to fullfil the power of the car shows how underpowered it is? Where simlar hot Hatches can do that from 3rd or even 4th.

Just saying...

10th Apr 2006, 03:55

Clap Clap Clap that man, well said.

My point re-inforced.

17th Apr 2006, 15:50

Yeah no need to THRASH it to get its best... unlike the 206,which is cheap and french, nuff said...

18th Apr 2006, 20:15

Well... reading all this leads to the conclusion that this car, as all cars, has it's pros and cons. It's a matter of the customer to decide accept it or not, some people like this car, some people don't. And for me the whole car is great, also if you see it historically: Rally winner, many design innovations, great engine, and it's a legend if you are a fan of the WRC and you don't have the money to buy a Subaru WRX Sti. I think you all have to see this debate as relative to the customers. I am aware that we have tech data to compare each hatch, but it is all relative in terms of the final customer. I'm not a rally driver, not even a racer, but I'm very happy with my purchase and my choice.

20th Apr 2006, 19:09

Good points, and respect you views. But everytime I see one of those I can't help but notice the clear Lexus lights and a baseball cap, and we all know what the name for them ppl are.

25th Apr 2006, 11:24

So you're saying you never see people in Astra's, Ford Focus's and Clio's boy racer'd up to the max with baseball cap wearing drivers at the wheel? And that those rear clusters are exclusive to Peugeots? I must be seeing a lot of funny shaped 206's on the road.

25th Apr 2006, 19:16

Makes no difference to me what cars you mentioned there, they are all crap anyway, depreciate quick (maybe not the focus as much) But still fix or repair daily...

18th May 2006, 04:28

Has anyone noticed that those people who own the gti 180, seem to love it, while those who have test driven the gti 180, seem to dislike it.

This seems to backup the opinion that the car takes a reasonable time to get used to!

I would also like to add, that those who read magazine reviews and then comment on the car, should perhaps not post a comment! (If I want a magazine review I will go to a different site)

A magazines opinion on a user review site is irrelevant...30 comments should not be based on the views of a single person, even if they are a professional reviewer for a reliable magazine.

11th Jun 2006, 01:33

I don't own this car, nor have I driven it, I have a Clio 182...

I would like to say one thing however... to all those people who have something against having to thrash the car to get the best from it, whats wrong with that?

If you want to extract maximum performance from ANY car, you will need to rev it to the red line. Even my old TDI 130 was like this - while that may not be the "best" way to drive it, it was the fastest.

So you could by a turbo hot hatch, and you "wouldn't need to thrash it". You don't need to thrash a N/A car either... my Clio is quicker than a lot of cars even before it comes on cam.

I drove a Seat Ibiza 1.8T Cupra yesterday, and it was boring. Sure it was more effortless than the Clio, but whats the point in that? You may as well have a diesel if you are going to drive like that.

24th Dec 2006, 13:49

I happen 2 own a 2006 model, 206 RC (as it is named here in Lebanon). It's an absolute blast 2 drive & definitely has the looks of a potent pocket rocket. I agree that built quality has a little bit 2 envy for however reliability is great. The engine is extremely punchy over 5000 RP-M's, but as any normally aspirated, 2 litre engine should be! Handling & grip are way over average & the ESP is there when needed. If you say the ride is a bit 2 harsh, most hot hatches are! I have shredded 172's on various occasions, however most RC owners who know the Type R, are aware it can almost eat any hot hatch 4 breakfast, so I just wouldn't bother! All in all, I believe the 206 RC is a great buy. Awaiting the 1.6 liter, 175hp turbocharged 207 RC. The turbocharged engine is produced in alliance with BMW & will equip the coming Cooper S. The engine tested on the later has been already praised by many critics. Can't wait!