A Few Questions:
Engines - which one do I go for 1.1 or 1.5 diesel
Where do I find a cheap one
Which is the best trim level (there seem to be hundreds)
Which is the best buy
Any other comments or suggestions welcome.
thanks
|
|
Can I ask why your picking a 106? If its insurance your concerned about, the Peugeot 306 in petrol 1.6 or the Turbodiesel is just as cheap, when I was car shopping.
|
|
the 106 is cheaper, smaller, and has the right amount of power that im allowed (first car)
|
the 106 is cheaper, smaller, and has the right amount of power that im allowed (first car)
How do you intend to use the car? More city?
|
|
bit of everything. but the 306 is out of the question.
|
|
|
|
Go for the 1.5 - I borrowed the smaller engined diesel as a courtesy car and it was frightening - it couldn't get out of it's own way, pulling out of a side road into traffic needed a quarter of a mile clear...0 to 60 about 20 secs.Sorry, no advice to give on the other points.
P.
|
The 1.1 petrol is light and easy to drive. The 1.5 diesel is noisier and requires power steering (not always standard) and the handling is not as good. The 1.1 is economical about 40-45mpg.
Trim levels? Try to get one with a sunroof as they can get quite warm in summer and a rear screen wiper is essential. After that, mots of the rest is immaterial. But Zest1 is lowest spec and Zest 3 the highest with best sunrood, better quality trim etc.
Watch all models for rust underneath at rear (bootfloor), and engine headgasket leaks (oil in water/water in oil or overheating.).
Use Autotrader wbsite : easiest to find..imo
madf
|
|
The 1.5 diesel is OK if you give it a bit of welly.
|
I would be tempted to direct you towards the Saxo. OK, it is basically the same car but I have a 97P Saxo 1.5 SX that has PAS, EW, CL 5 door which I don't think you will get on the 106. PAS especially is to be recommended as the steering can be quite heavy without.
Mine is coming up for 90k miles and has averaged between 65-70mpg all its life.
|
|
If the price is right then fine. Have to say the 1.5 diesel is looking good at the mo!
|
|
|
|
|
My first brand new car when I was 20 was a 1.5 106 diesel on an M plate, cracking little car, would do 70mpg and I was getting paid 34ppm for my job, doing over 1000 miles a month, made loads out of that car, was stupid to get rid of it. But it was noisy and by todays standards the steering was heavy (no PAS), but would have another if I needed a small car. My next car 2 years after that one was a new 106 1.1 petrol on a P plate, this one had electric power steering so was much lighter to drive. Again a cracking little car which was nippy around town but lacked the better power of the diesel. Again I would have another. Out of the 2 I would go for the petrol as my first car as it was easier to drive round town, but if I were to get another one now it would be the diesel as it would go forever on a tank of fuel and I am a cheapskate ;o)
|
I had one for a year and loved it. It was a 97 1.1 3-dr Extra Time special edition so it had fog lights, power steering, remote locking and a sunroof. It was lovely to drive (much nicer than current 2001 Corsa) and never missed a beat. Just make sure you can get comfortable inside- the worst part of it for me was the clutch pedal- it was a terrible shape and meant I could only push it down with the ball of my foot which would hurt like mad in traffic.
Oh and another thing- don't go for one thats got the keypad immobiliser. They're quite fragile and its a pain in the backside to keep having to put the code in everytime to start it.
Ben
|
|
I would disagree re the keypad being fragile - another thread recently said they were bullet proof and I certainly haven't had any problems with mine.
|
|
1.1 Pug 106 is pretty nippy for what it is, handles better than other small runabouts such as Fiesta, Clio, Corsa, and on the motorway you can get over 50mpg if you stick to the limit - you wouldn't want to go faster if you value your eardrums. The 1.5 diesel isn't a bad engine but it's a case of worse performance for not much more mpg.
|
|
Oh yeah - steering and pedals...you don't need power steering with the 1.1, but if you're tall like me the pedals could be awkward. Try before you buy.
|
|
There just doesnt seem to be a car without quirks! I'm 17 and looking for first car (preferable 1998 oldest, although newer would be better) 6'1 (That a problem for the pedals?) Want something good to drive, decent image etc. but at the same time something that wont mind a bit of new driver abuse for the next couple of years. Also insurance must be cheap (group 3 max). I can afford to spend about 2k at the mo. Am i dreaming?
|
Well I'm 6'5 and was 6' 4 when I had my Fiesta and found it fine.But it was group 6 sadly (and 2 grand for a 1996 model).
Handles a lot better than the 106 though. Cracking, fun little car./
|
Yeh thought about the fiesta, although ultimately the insurance will be too expensive
|
No idea as to the insurance groupings but what about the Punto?
My mate got one when we were in Sixth form and still has it. Surprisingly spacious inside especially at the back because the roof doesn't slope.
Think his is a 1.1 and seems to shift perfectly well when pushed.
|
|
Make sure that if you buy one with a factory fit sunroof that it doesn't leak and fry the central locking remote.
|
|
Handles a lot better than the 106 though. Cracking, fun little car./
Did you ever actually drive a 106? I would say that the 106 far exceeded the Fiesta in terms of handling. A year or so ago I was even looking at getting a 106 rallye as a toy to keep in the garage, for a 1.3 (I think thats what it was) it went like you know what off a shovel, Drove one when I had my pug 10 years ago but was too expensive to buy at the time as I had a huge mortgage to pay (well it seemed like it at the time)
|
Yes I did. An M reg Mardi-Gras so unless things have moved on, I still stand my my statement.
That being said, I'm comparing it to the Fiesta I bought which had 16" alloys on which may have had something to do with how it handled.
I realise it's a sweeping statement and that the 106 I drove was a mark one and my Fiesta a brand new design (at the time in 1996) but I wasn't all that impressed at the time.
|
I've driven a couple of 106s and a Saxo and found the brakes on them frighteningly poor -- and indeed my brother rear-ended another car in one.
The other thing I'd be concerned about is safety -- the design is 15 years old and these cars collapse in a crash.
I don't know how much you'll be paying but from personal experience I'd steer well clear of the 106, it's a death-trap on wheels. No way do I want a car with poor brakes.
|
You need to keep the handbrake and rear drums adjusted well on a Saxo/106. That keeps the pedal feeling good.
It is nonsense about the brakes being poor. The Saxo 1.1 is fitted with 2 types of brakes. Bendix and ATE.
The Bendix pads are shared with the 405 1.9!! See www.webparts.co.uk/Brakeworld/BUYGUIDE/HTML/BW199....M and www.webparts.co.uk/Brakeworld/BUYGUIDE/HTML/BW297....M
Get the 1.5D and you won't be disappointed! (They also have the better brakes).
Ben
|
The mark 1 106 had limited carsh protection. The mark 2 post 1995? had sideimpact protection and longer bonnet and safer.
As for 106 brakes, they are very good in my experience of Mark1 and 2 .Perhaps experiences are tempered by poor maintenance? Rear ending perhaps speaks more for the driver's abilities or lack of them?
Comments about death traps and poor brakes! (could apply to many cars designed before 1990 I gues:-)
Is this real world? Not my experience at all.(SWMBO's deteriorated due to lack of use: new pads and disks solved it and frequent use whne I drive once a week make all the difference.). Son's Mark2 ditto.
My experience is long lasting cars easy to drive but diesels require careful maintenance. Brakes more fiddly to work on than Fiestas are so perhaps maintenance is an issue ( the slide which supports the pads in the front calipers tends to rust and porevent free pad movement and hence auto adjustment as pads wear. Cleaning and a touch of brake grease solve it)
I am responsible for maintaining a Mark1 1.4 diesel 106 (SWMBO's), a Mark 2 1.1 petrol 106 (older son's) and a 1993 1.1 Fiesta (younger son's) so have some practical knowledge of the issues involved....:-)
madf
|
|
Did you ever actually drive a 106? I would say that the 106 far exceeded the Fiesta in terms of handling.
I'd go along with that. It's easy to confuse responsive steering (which the Fiesta post 96 has) with good handling (which the 106 has). Peugeot just seem to have a knack of designing cars that handle.
|
I had a Pug 106 1.5D. Did about 20,000 Miles in it.
M reg, 1995.
Great little car.
Things to be aware of:
Has no water temperature gauge so if the radiator goes (as in mine) then the head cooks and it's a new engine. The light comes on after the head cracks. About £800. I was actually driving to London to get a new Radiator at the time..
So - check and replace the radiator if corroded(About £70 or so) and 20 mins work.
It's super economical, and easy to drive even without PAS.
Big down though - the windows in the Graduate are not tinted. It was an OVEN in the sun! Unbearable. In the cold the engine warmed up v. quickly.
Otherwise, get the Timing belt done well before time and it should be great. Personally I don't like cars from London as they tend to have had a more "stressful" life than "country cars"...
Good luck.
|
One more thing - we did some house moves in it, and took the rear seats and back out (spanner and 10 mins) and we managed to fit a double sofa, a bicycle and several holdalls and potted plants in at the same time, as well as a passenger. Rear hatch is v. big. Amazed the neighbours when we unloaded it.
Handling always v. good and tyres v. v. cheap.
|
Have owned a 106 and a Saxo 1.5D Exclusive. Virtually identical really, except that the diesel is noiser to start, but the economy mentioned earlier is just so unbelievable it's not true! But it is! I regularly got 55-60 mpg and that's with town driving and short journeys amongst the longer ones. Cheap to service/maintain etc generally. To be honest, for a first learner type car, it's be ideal.
(The Saxo is T reg and for sale BTW!)
|
|
interesting what color saxo milage spec etc etc.
|
SWMBO has an R reg 106 1.1 XN. It is pretty basic, but reliable and fun to drive (especially out of town). The only fault I can find is that the steering feels very heavy - although I am used to power steering and she doesn't complain. As a cheap first car for a 17 year old I would have thought it was perfect.
It is for sale too...
|
|
|
|
|
