| Year of manufacture | 1998 |
| First year of ownership | 2002 |
| Most recent year of ownership | 2003 |
| Engine and transmission | 1.9 diesel Manual |
| Performance marks | 4 / 10 |
| Reliability marks | 8 / 10 |
| Comfort marks | 8 / 10 |
| Dealer Service marks | 7 / 10 |
| Running Costs (higher is cheaper) | 10 / 10 |
| Overall marks (average of all marks) |
7.4 / 10
|
| Distance when acquired | 76000 kilometres |
| Most recent distance | 122000 kilometres |
| Previous car | Nissan 100NX |
Summary:
An economic bargain
Faults:
The front left window mechanism used to jam frequently and I had to disengage the trim to fix it which was very annoying.
General Comments:
The economy is excellent and running costs are low.
The engine runs smoothly and is very quiet.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 9th January, 2004
| Year of manufacture | 1998 |
| First year of ownership | 1998 |
| Most recent year of ownership | 2003 |
| Engine and transmission | 1.8 16 valves, petrol Manual |
| Performance marks | 10 / 10 |
| Reliability marks | 10 / 10 |
| Comfort marks | 8 / 10 |
| Dealer Service marks | 9 / 10 |
| Running Costs (higher is cheaper) | 6 / 10 |
| Overall marks (average of all marks) |
8.6 / 10
|
| Distance when acquired | 0 kilometres |
| Most recent distance | 68000 kilometres |
| Previous car | Peugeot 505 |
Summary:
A great car to buy
Faults:
The dealer had to change one of the rear wheel axis. It was covered by the warranty.
General Comments:
High fuel consumption on city. Excellent on the route.
Very appealing car.
Very comfortable interiors.
Agile and fast, very easy to drive.
Sporty feeling when you drive it.
The dealer has a great service.
The car din't have any serious problem in 6 years, only minor things because of the use.
Very solid construction. It was used on dirt roads for 5000 kilometers and it's behavior was excelent.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 7th January, 2004
| Year of manufacture | 1998 |
| First year of ownership | 2001 |
| Most recent year of ownership | 2002 |
| Engine and transmission | 2.0 16v Manual |
| Performance marks | 8 / 10 |
| Reliability marks | 7 / 10 |
| Comfort marks | 4 / 10 |
| Running Costs (higher is cheaper) | 4 / 10 |
| Overall marks (average of all marks) |
5.8 / 10
|
| Distance when acquired | 40000 miles |
| Most recent distance | 50000 miles |
| Previous car | Opel Manta |
Summary:
Great engine in a poorly built car
Faults:
Interior rear-view mirror fell off, taking with it the rain sensor and a chunk of windscreen with it.
Positive Battery terminal plastic adapter broke causing battery to disconnect whilst driving and alarm to go off whilst moving!!
Interior door card started coming away from door.
Driver side window dropped into the door and could not be retrieved without removing the door card and repairing.
General Comments:
I owned a scruffy old 1986 Opel Manta for 4 years before deciding to buy a more 'modern' performance car with comfort and speed. I wanted something that was very fast, but with mod-cons. I was getting fed up of ice forming on the INSIDE of the Manta on winter mornings!!
Reviews of the GTi-6 praised the high speed 167BHP engine and chassis, claiming that the car was the leader in the 'hot hatch' market. At the time the other alternative for performance was the Renault Clio Sport (172BHP), the Seat Leon Cupra (180BHP) and the Civic Type-R, all of which were much more than the PUG.
I hated it.
BAD POINTS -
1) The interior was very poor, the cabin was falling apart around me and the material that formed the seats and door cards visibly wore during the 8 months that I owned this car.
2) The exterior body panels are paper-thin, I really mean this. When you wash the car the panels 'pop'. You have to be SOOOOO careful when opening the doors not put a ding in them.
3) When raining outside and driving, if you open the window the roof seems to channel the water directly through the window. NOT a good design.
...and embarrassing when driving with a new girlfriend in the passenger seat!
4) The car, despite having a highly regarded Chassis, has a surprising amount of body roll on corners and the car feels too light and unstable at high speed.
5) The paint is very thin, I picked up many stonechips and scratches all over the body when I owned this car. On a black finish, these really stand out and make the car look very tatty in a short time.
6) Stupidly high insurance compared to other hot hatches.
GOOD POINTS -
1) The engine has excellent performance, a very quick 0-60, quoted at 8.5 seconds, but some road tests say that is is closer to 7.5 seconds. You really can feel the accelaration push you back into your seat when you floor it.
In summary this is a great engine stuck in a very badly built car. I ignored warnings about the build quality of this vehicle because all I cared about was the permormance figures. I had the car for 8 months and lost almost £2k on it. every week I had it, it depreciated and got more tatty.
I am now hoping to buy a Honda Civic 1.8 VTi. Wonderful and reliably built car with the perfomance to match. In the meantime I am back to an old Opel Manta for my kicks. The brush with the PUG nearly knocked my faith in 'modern' cars.
Buy Japanese or German.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No
Review Date: 19th December, 2003
I wrote this original review and forgot to say that the Turning circle on this car is outrageous!! You know how you spin into a side road to turn around and come out of the junction to face the opposite way? Well, you can't do that in this car, in an attempt to save the CV joints or something the turning circle means that you need a 5 point turn where a 3 would have done.
You won't believe me from this (you'll think "oh. it can't be that bad. I could live with that"), but once you try one you will see exactly what I mean. It amazing that it could have left the factory like this!!