Renault 16 Reviews - Page 2 of 2

1973 Renault 16 TS 1.6 from Australia and New Zealand

Year of manufacture1973
Engine and transmission 1.6
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10

Faults:

Very little. It was purchased for $250 and used on a daily basis around Sydney. It was driven to the Snowy Mountains and the Byron hinterland a number of times, 800km and 1700km round trips respectively. It was regularly driven on harsh dirt roads in country NSW. The cooling system glass tank blew on a trip to the Snowy Mountains. A rear shock absorber snapped in the outback. In both cases, the car was still driveable. I changed the gearbox as it jumped out of 1st gear. This was not a difficult job.

General Comments:

It was my first car, a fabulous car. A wierd looking thing, but a lovely design and fantastic to drive. They are very comfortable and are happy cruising about the city or the country. At the time of ownership, a Renault 16 (or 12) was possibly the cheapest car to buy and since the people who owned one were generally cash strapped, the mechanics were very reasonable when it came to the cost of spare parts. I bought two wrecks for spares for $50 each. One was pillaged, the other was registered and given to a friend. I eventually sold it after 3 years of ownership to a guy in Coogee who needed a car to fit his drum kit in. I wonder what happened to it? Following this 16, I bought a Citroen CX, which was a truly marvelous car, but much less faithful than my 16. Find a good 16 and keep it, you will not regret it.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 20th January, 2000

31st Jul 2001, 03:41

Why call the R16 a "poor man's car"? In its day it was the top (most expensive) Renault as is the Safrane today in their product line. As a matter of fact, the R16 was meant to be bought by a very large audience, hence all its features. Long legged for the country, comfortable suspension for all purposes, luggage features non-plus-ultra! Reliability and safety were all incorporated. Even the repair fee's were clearly stated in the owners brochure addendum. Does not have to do with a poor man's signature.

The car was cheap to buy as a used car simply because so many were around by its popularity. Repairing a previously owned car with even a large mileage was also marketed by Renault.

Unfortunately parts are rarely available from Renault today, which is a pity. Citroen does a better job here for their Ds/ID series.

It is unbelievable the R16 is less popular as an oldtimer here then the ID/DS's. I own 4 R16's today and threw out the R25 with its nasty engine and suspension habits. Rate the 16 higher please!

Greetings,

Mario.

1967 Renault 16 TL 1.5 from Sweden

Year of manufacture1967
Engine and transmission 1.5
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.8 / 10

Faults:

Starter motor, rust in front wings, rear brakes.

General Comments:

A very comfortable car that was awarded European car of the year in 1965.

This was the first hatchback car ever made, and it has been the model for almost all modern cars.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 7th March, 1999

28th Jul 2003, 16:37

The Renault 16 was NOT the first hatchback - The Renault 4 was, which predated the 16 by four years.

12th Jan 2006, 07:57

Hmm. Renault 4 looks more like a wagon than a hatchback. Am I being pedantic?

8th Feb 2006, 15:12

I agree with the above comment, I don't think the Renault 4 although is a good car in its own right, is a hatchback, its more like a van, The clue is in the word "hatch" something of which the Renault 4 is not. A hatchback car has a landing panel above the floor of the car, the 16 has, the 4 has not.

6th May 2006, 03:31

The Renault 16 (I owned one) was the first five-door hatchback (known as a sedan-wagon) with an unequal right/left wheelbase (forgot that one didn't you?). It was the model for ALL modern four-door hatchbacks. The Renault 4 had a wagon rear, without a fold-down interior (or fold-up in the R-16's case.

1st Jul 2006, 14:50

...and the Renault 16 design was allegedly nicked from Citroen!

13th Jul 2006, 15:34

The 16 was definitely the first hatchback - the 4 was called a fourgonette - wagonette - or wagon. The unequal wheelbase caused me a problem in Norway when the idiots at the vehicle inspection thought the car was twisted and took my plates so I couldn't drive it. Stole what from Citroen??? the 2CV could have been a hatch if they closed the top of the sardine can and hinged higher - but they didn't think of that.

22nd Jul 2006, 14:21

Citoen did produce a hatchback like design well before the 16...the Citroen Traction Avant Commerciale.. launched in the 1930's. Plus the above comment was regarding Renault possibly taking the project F design from Citroen and copying it.. Renault 16!! Check out the supplied link. If you look at aspects of the Renault 16 design they are slightly Citoenesque... such as the lack of rear arches. Look at the outline of project F and compare it to the Renault.

1969 Renault 16 GLS 1.5 petrol from Netherlands

Year of manufacture1969
Engine and transmission 1.5 petrol
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10

Faults:

Left rear wheel bearing changed.

Right driving shaft changed.

General Comments:

Very reliable, although the car is over 30 years old. Also very comfortable and nice looks.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 7th March, 1999

Average review marks: 7.9 / 10, based on 10 reviews