(first posted 3/12/2014) France is justifiably famous for good food, good wine, great scenery and (outside of Paris at least) a wonderfully relaxed atmosphere and pace of life. One aspect that always pleases is that some of best of these are also amongst the least glamorous and thus, cheaper options. The best food is from small local markets; a small restaurant in a village or by the main road will often be just as good as someplace charging twice the price, and there is no need to buy from anywhere other than a local producer or cooperative to find an excellent wine. French cars are similar: the smallest, cheapest ones are often the best, and the Renault 5 is a prime example. Indeed, apart from the Citroën DS, CX and SM, it is hard to recall a truly memorable large or six-cylinder French car of the last 50 years.
The 5 has gone down in popular history as one of the most influential cars of the 1970s. It is recognised as one of the first superminis: cars larger than a Mini but smaller than a Ford Escort, Fiat 128, VW Beetle or Opel Kadett; almost always with a hatchback, usually two doors and front-wheel drive.
Arguably, the Italians were first out of the blocks in 1969 with the Autobianchi A112, and the 1971 Fiat 127, which was built on the same mechanical base. For comparison’s sake, Issigonis’s Mini was 120 inches long on a 80-inch wheelbase; the Autobianchi was 127 inches long on an 80-inch wheelbase; the Fiat, 142 inches long on an 87-inch wheelbase; and the Renault, 139 inches long on a 95-inch wheelbase.
The key conceptual differences between Mini and the Italian duo involved their hatchbacks, increased rear passenger and boot space, and their gearboxes, which were mounted on the end of the transverse engine, rather than underneath, as on the Issigonis cars. Interestingly, although the Autobianchi had a hatchback, the original versions of the Fiat didn’t, having a conventional boot lid instead despite two-box styling. They also had (very unusual in Europe) a transverse leaf spring rear suspension.
When the Renault 5 came to the European market in 1972, it offered something every manufacturer in that market segment has sought since: a small car with instant style appeal. This advantage was evident very early in its life, to the extent that the car’s role was refined before it was even launched. The car was originally intended to replace the Renault 4, itself effectively Renault’s response to the Citroën 2CV, but instead wound up being pitched as a funky, slightly upmarket alternative.
According to legend, Renault managers saw the design by Michel Boué drawn over a photograph of the Renault 4 and determined to produce the car pretty much there and then.
That was in 1968, before the A112 and 127 were available. The original expectation had been for a five-door car to supplant the Renault 4 and sell alongside the more modern-looking Renault 6, but a three-door body style was chosen instead, highlighting the 5’s unique position in the company’s lineup.
Renault’s head of product planning, and later Chairman, Bernard Hanon, championed the 5 from 1968, being among the first to see how it could benefit from its styling, as well as from its size and practicality, in a way that the Fiat and Autobianchi did not. Indeed, no other 1970s supermini had anything approaching its charm–perhaps the next car in this area of the market to do so was the 2000 BMW Mini, albeit at a considerably higher price point.
Despite sharing mechanicals with the humble Renault 4, the 5’s appeal to younger buyers was substantially greater, something of which Renault was well aware and accordingly made much of in its advertising and marketing.
The key differences between the 5 and its competition were a direct result of the car’s origins. Not only did it have a long wheelbase, it also inherited an unusual longitudinal drivetrain layout, with the gearbox mounted ahead of the engine. Even taking into account this driver’s petite size, it’s clear that packaging was one of the Renault’s many strong suits.
The first series interior is, to me at least, a wonderful example of 1970s style, with an original treatment of the dash facing, a simple instrument package cut into it, and a large window area giving plenty of light and visibility. The rear seat also folded down, making the 5 a surprisingly practical load carrier, as well as a comfortable way to carry four people.
Its unique layout left the car with room to store the spare wheel under the bonnet and also with a classic French umbrella gear lever sprouting from the dash, just like in a 2CV or Renault 4, as the gear linkage went over the engine.
This was moved to a conventional position, on export specification cars at least, by 1974. Look closely at the interior shots and you can see the bulkhead swelling out around the engine, limiting the location of the radio to an unusual vertical position.
The engines were established units, coming from the Renault 4 and 6 as well as the older, rear-engined Renault 8 and 10, and ranging from 850cc to 1300cc. Later, Renault offered a 1400cc version and also an optional automatic gearbox. The suspension, as we see here, was in line with the company’s standard practice, with longitudinal torsion bars and double-wishbones up front, and staggered transverse torsion bars in the rear (with a slightly longer wheelbase on the right side), acting on trailing arms. In the best French tradition, very long suspension travel and excellent damping ensured comfort rivaling that of larger cars as well as stable handling, despite significant body roll.
In 1979, Renault added a five-door version with a new interior, which traded the original model’s simplicity for some perceived plushness. At this time, Renault also offered a deliberately high geared version, known as the GTL, often fitted with very deep polyester mouldings all around. The 5 was incidentally the first car to have polyester bumpers. In dispensing with the original door releases, formed by an indentation on the quarter panel, the new five-door sacrificed one of the car’s most distinctive styling cues as a necessary concession to its expanding role as family transportation. The three-door, of course, retained its signature door releases, leading my mum-in-law to buy a five-door instead!
Otherwise, the car was left untouched: the simple, elegant and thoroughly clean and fuss-free lines remained modern throughout its long life.
Quickly, and totally, the 5 became the fashionable small car to have, with advertising like this only reinforcing the image. In the UK, as the country joined the European Union (or Common Market, as we called it then) in 1973, and BL offered nothing to directly compete (the Mini was much smaller, the Allegro larger and lacking the style, to say the least), the Renault 5 became, ahead of the FIAT 127, Peugeot 104 and later, the VW Polo, the small car of choice for those willing to move away from the established UK brands.
“On this photo, you won’t find a air of menace; I’m the Renault 5”
Even the 1976 Ford Fiesta could not challenge it for style and image; Chrysler Europe never had a competitor; Vauxhall-Opel had nothing, other than the conservative and sturdy Chevette and KadettCity, until the Nova and Corsa were offered in 1983.
The Renault 5 went to North America as well. After a suggestion that it should be badged “Frog” to take on from the VW Rabbit, Renault opted instead to badge it “Le Car,” which at once played up its French nature and allowed some humour in the advertising. Renault retired it from the USA in 1981 and, in partnership with AMC, replaced it with the Renault Alliance and Encore, cars sized much more to North American tastes and, of course, assembled in Kenosha.
Some markets, notably Spain, also got a four-door saloon version, which was known as the Renault 7–these are now a very rare sight anywhere. Such small saloons are still offered by Renault, Citroën, Peugeot and FIAT in certain southern and eastern European markets and are based on cars like the more familiar Clio, C4, 207 and Punto hatchbacks.
I’ll let you decide if the three-box styling worked as well as the hatchback shape.
The 5 had a great motorsport career too, though the rally car was a very different beast. The R5 Turbo was mid-engined, using the familiar 1400cc pushrod four-cylinder, and won the Monte Carlo rally in 1981, part of the World Rally Championship, on its first outing. However, it was soon outgunned by the four-wheel drive Audi Quattro. The distinctive styling changes for the mid-engined car were by Marcello Gandini and the car became the first of a consistent series of Renault hot hatchbacks, today based around the Renault Clio. The most extreme version so far has been a mid-engined Clio with a 3.0 litre V6 and somewhat challenging road behaviour, especially in the wet.
For those after a more sane experience, Renault continued a tradition by offering the 5 in Alpine/Gordini form, beginning in 1976. This less famous–but still capable–sporting edition was one of the first performance hatches in production, initially powered by a cross-flow version of the 1.4, making 92 horsepower. For the last two years, it was also fortified with a turbocharger, giving it 110 horsepower and a 110 mph top speed.
The Alpine/Gordini was gone for 1985, when the original 5 was replaced by what was promoted as the Supercinq (Super 5) by Renault. These completely new cars shared much with their Renault 9 and 11 (Alliance and Encore) siblings, including their transverse engines and MacPherson struts. As with the R5 Turbo, styling was by Gandini (who also penned the aforementioned Autobianchi) and was essentially an update of the original. As so often is the case, the sequel failed to match the subjective expectations of the audience, even if objectively, it was a better car for 1985.
The hot hatches, such as this (front-engined) 5GT Turbo, continued and the Supercinq remained Renault’s supermini competitor until 1991, when it was replaced in western Europe by the Clio and the smaller Twingo.
The featured cars are both post 1979 5-door models, and remained in daily use in southwest France as of last summer. Earlier examples are still around in smaller numbers as well.
The parking in the bush is typical of what you might see in many places in France; this car is fine, don’t worry. Without any doubt whatsoever, the 5 is one of France’s great cars which, like the bread and wine that share its national origin, prove that the finer things in life are not always the most expensive.
Related reading: Peugeot 205 VW Golf Mk1 Austin Allegro
Thank you, Roger.
These cars have always fascinated me, although I have only seen the “Le Car” versions. For me, the overall packaging is what seals the deal; it looks great, although that is an added benefit.
My parents shot pictures of an early two-door version in Southern France last year; the two-door makes this car. The four-door is so-so, but the saloon just doesn’t work from a visual standpoint.
Were these all gas powered throughout their life or was there a diesel version also?
I am only familiar with gasoline powered 5.
Peugeot came up the the 104 Diesel and was lavished with praise by the motor journalists for such a willing light weight Diesel engine. It dethroned the Golf Diesel for its lively character.
To my knowledge, neither the 1st-gen Renault 5 nor the Peugeot 104 were offered with a diesel engine.
At least, not in France.
Only 2nd gen french superminis, such as the 205, the Supercinq and the AX got diesel engines.
You are correct it was the 205 that was offered with a Diesel.
I was a kid when this cars came over here but what I always found curious about them was the wheels. They only used three nuts. As far as I know, this were the only cars like this.
Other French cars used 3 nuts per wheel. Imagine the savings for 1 million cars! Saving 4 million studs and nuts and the creation of 5 million holes compared to a design with 4 studs. That’s how you pinch the centime.
To mention a few: Renault Dauphine,4, 6, 8,10, Citroen 2CV, Dyane, Ami
The studs were so soft they often broke off when impact wrenches were used.
Interesting, still the Le Car was the only car that I have seen in person with only three wheel nuts. The others you mention I have only seen them in movies or the internet, and I didn’t knew that or seen their wheels. Now I am going to have to Google “three nut car wheels” to see what else I find.
Hillman Minx prior to the Audax series had 3 wheel studs.
When it comes to looks ,this is loved the Gremlin is hated
I don’t understand why. This looks to me like a car that one must appreciate for reasons that have nothing to do with its appearance.
Later Gremlins from 1977 and ’78 as well as the successor Spirit were actually quite nice looking smaller cars IMO, once AMC redid the front with a shorter clip it didn’t look nearly so nose-heavy. These Renaults looks very stubby to me.
One of my favorite shapes of the 1970’s. Sadly, Michel Boué never saw his dream go into production, as he passed away from cancer before the 5’s launch. This documentary is about 45 min long, but has some really good info and old footage in it. Be prepared to have some segments in French without subtitles, however!
http://en.int.renault.tv/factual/renault-icons/renault-icons-renault-5/
I’m rather surprised, in retrospect, that more superminis didn’t use the favored French rear trailing arm layout, also adopted to great effect by the Peugeot 205. True, it doesn’t allow camber gain, but neither does a beam axle, and trailing arms’ tendency to promote roll understeer can be managed with sensible anti-roll selection. With transverse torsion bars, the layout infringes very little on trunk space and allows a lot of wheel travel so the ride doesn’t get choppy. Even the British magazines thought the consumer-grade Peugeot 205 and the later Renault Supercinq were pretty much the gold standard for a comfortable ride and agile handling. A lot of the Japanese B- and C-segment cars could have taken a lesson there, as could the Mk1 Fiesta, which was reasonably nimble, but also rather stiff.
+100!
A beam axle, though, keeps the wheels more parallel to the ground, rather than to the body, meaning cars so equipped are more stable at the limit. Also might you mean roll oversteer?
edit: Because of how the trailing arms mounts to the body, wouldn’t cornering forces cause deflection in such a way that the wheels toe out?
edit: don’t most independent rear suspension systems toe-out under compression, unless somehow kept from doing so, causing roll oversteer and twitchy behavior? I thought many efforts were made to engineer out that tendency; I.E. the ’88 Civic’s compensating link, Mazda’s TTL and VW’s angled axle mounts. Doesn’t roll understeer have a desirable, stabilizing effect?
The cars did under-steer a lot. If you got into the corner too fast and lifted off the gas the under-steer quickly turned into over-steer and corrected the mistake. I would not call it twitchy I would call it self- correcting.
Honestly, though, the handling on the torsion-bar cars was hilarious in an awesome way. A friend in college had a Renault-obsessed father who owned an R5 Turbo 2, an R4 (the only one I had ever seen in Canada) and daily drove a Medallion with R21 badging, My friend was given a Canadian-market LeCar with an R5 Gordini engine for his college car, and it was one of the most fun cars I have ever driven. Take it into a corner and it would lean until it seemed like you were about to take the door mirrors off — then it would seem to take a “set” and just grip like crazy. Also true that you could throttle-steer them, and this just added to the amusement factor. I have wanted one ever since, but they never seemed to come up when I had the money. Now that I am into a longer-term resto-mod of an 80s Japanese car I can’t see me getting one any time soon, more’s the pity.
PSA mount the rear axle on soft bushings allowing it to steer, works really well and less complicated than the rear steering on their bigger cars, helped the Xsaras to first 5 placings at the 98 Monte Carlo on debut.
A sad side of the Renault 5 story is that Michel Boue died of cancer before the Renault Five was launched.
Renault Sport guys were desperate to develop an AWD or 4WD R5 Turbo as ” Maxi ” the final evolution of the Renault 5 Turbo’s, but the accountants said NON.
Most R5 Turbo evolution models were named after French rallies they performed in, like the R5 Turbo Cevennes, the R5 Turbo Tour de Corse and so on.
R5 Turbo’s were quite successfull as Group B cars in tarmac rallies but were also successfully raced in the R5 Turbo cup, with quite well known popular international drivers.
The R5 Turbo was actually quite a big success as a street wise rallycar, the first few hundred named Turbo 1 had an aluminium roof panel, aluminium door skins and a fabulous ludricous dash, only the French can make.
After the first 500 Turbo one’s Renault decided to rationalize production and theTurbo 2 received all steel panels and the dashboard and seats of the Renault 5 Alpine (or gordini as it was called in the UK)
In the American LeCar version (from my understanding, it was originally to be called Frog), this was a car that I always really, really, really wanted. Summer of ’81 I found a clean used late ’70’s model sitting in the local Toyota dealer’s used car lot. Went down, hooked up with a salesman, and took it for a test drive.
It caught fire five miles from the dealership. One very abashed salesman had to go to a neighbor’s house and call the shop to send someone out to pick up us and the car. It was the only time, in those days, that a salesman didn’t try to pull me back to look at something else when I lost interest in the car I’d test driven.
I figured that was God’s way of saying, “you don’t want to own a Renault”, and dropped the idea.
I remember these in Canada too…Viva Renault Le Car…!
We had the original Renault 5 here in Canada before the Americanized Le Car version. I came close to buying a new 1980 model but instead opted for the diesel Rabbit. The 5 was more fun to drive, and despite the soft suspension and body roll (or maybe because of it), it felt like a quality car. My mom got one a couple years later and it became my brother’s first car. I think it was fun and reliable and he has fond memories of it.
Great article ! I’d never heard of a Renault 5 sedan, it looks very odd. Like they made a little sedan from two different cars. The yellow one can’t be too far away since it has Dutch plates. So I checked it. It’s registered as a 1976 Renault Siete TL. It has a 37 kW-50 hp 1,037 cc engine. It must be imported from another country, the current owner has it since march 2008.
I had a 1982 Renault 5, exactly the same color as the one with the hood open. You see that flexible tube on the air filter housing ? It’s in the summer-position. During winter it pointed downwards, so it was right above the exhaust. Nice warm air intake !
I have seen them in Spain back in 1977. By the way, do you remember Franco?
I only remember his death and funeral, I was 9 back in 1975.
The 7 or ‘Siete’ was only made in Spain by FASA Renault. There was never a French made saloon version of the 5. Incidentally they have a slightly longer wheelbase than the 5, visible in the bigger gap between rear door and wheelarch.
Mine was an 80. Interesting car. Suspension was so well controlled that I could bomb through a twisty canyon and play Niki Lauda. The 85 GLC that followed it, a better car by nearly every measure, failed in the canyon, lacked the Renault’s suspension control and rigid body.
My first front driver, and, with a raging 50hp, was also my first experience with torque steer. Top speed on the freeway depended on wind direction. With a tail wind, it would cruise at 80. With a headwind, it topped out at 55. The torque peak was at 2500rpm, which came up at 35mph in 3rd gear and 45 in 4th, which made for relaxed puttering around town. Mileage for the ancient pushrod was a subpar 28. Drivability, thanks to the manual choke Weber, was vastly better than the cold blooded Fords of the day, whose choke would come off way too soon, leaving the cars sputtering and stumbling until throughly warmed up.
The interior was the best part. The seats looked like nothing special and, in mine, were covered with a blue and grey pokadot upholstry, but were more comfortable than anything else I ever had. I already elaborated on how well designed the hatchback was in the hatchback thread.
One thoughtless design element: the defroster pulled air from a plenum in the engine compartment. Air for the plenum came through a grill in the top of the hood. While the plenum had a drain tube to drain water from the plenum when it rained, snow would collect in the plenum. Turning on the defroster after the engine was warm would draw snow from the plenum, melt it in the heater core, then blow the water onto the windshield, where it promptly froze. I learned the hard way to turn the defroster on full blast as soon as I started the engine to blow all the snow out of the system. The snow would blow out of the defroster vents like the output of a ski resort snow machine, settling on the dash, and me, but at least I didn’t end up with a frost covered windshield.
The mechanicals had their challenges. Detroit iron had gotten me used to at least one major failure per year. The Renault upheld that tradition: alternator, master cylinder, brake proportioning valve, radiator. What really sank it though was rust. I had rust coming through on all four fenders in less than 5 years. I saw the car 2 years after I got rid of it. The rear fenders above the wheels were completly gone and I couldn’t see what was holding the front fenders on as they were completely rusted through in front of the doors and along the hood.
I named mine “the Frogmobile”
Thanks for covering this car, Roger, as it is easily one of my favorites. I became familiar with the Renault 5 in the late ’80s during a family trip to Iran, where they were extremely popular from the late ’70s until the late ’90s. Awesome, awesome cars for that country, which has a lot of winding, mountain roads and aggressive, crowded city streets. Compared to the other common cars over there, the Hillman Hunter and Kia Pride/Mazda 121/Ford Festiva (another good one), the Renault felt oddly placid. I could bound over the largest bumps and dips in the road and weave its way around dim witted drivers without breaking a sweat.
Coming from the US, the lack of harshness in the chassis was unusual, and even as a child, was noticeable.
Of course, the cars were obviously not perfect, and their engines dangerously overmatched by freeway speeds. Not a good car for American highways.
Don’t sneer at the LeCar’s fabric sunroof. Opening that sunroof cooled off my car faster than any A/C could and the sunroof added headroom. I would not have fit in the car without it.
My barber hated it though. I had hair back in those days, and if I had the roof open on the way to the barber, he had to get the hair untangled before he could cut it.
A very interesting backstory on this car. Like most Americans, I knew this as the LeCar. I had no firsthand experience, other than that the guys who lived downstairs from our college apartment had one, about 1980-81. I had a well worn Plymouth Scamp at the time and had no desire to trade them. Now that I think about it, I believe I recall seeing the rust starting to bubble up around the edges.
By the time these were a few years old, nobody seemed to take them seriously any more. Whatever their merits (and I’m sure there were some), these were the cars that were a bad joke before the Yugo took that crown.
I, too, remember them being sorta jokes in the late ’80s, when there were still a few around. I think the name Le Car had a lot to do with it; how stupid. VW didn’t keep the Rabbit name in an effort to be taken seriously, and while that may have been a mistake, it showed the misguided effort to make small cars look “cute.” They need to be passed off as the serious engineering efforts they are; if they later acquire a reputation for being cute which works in their favor, that’s a different story.
That’s an interesting point of view. Do you have such car in mind? The Ford Festiva (Mazda 121)maybe?
It was a brilliant design let down by mediocre quality and not being suitable for typical US driving demands/expectations, as well as the usual Renault bugaboo of iffy dealers. If only Toyota had built this.
It was a brilliant design let down by mediocre quality and not being suitable for typical US driving demands/expectations,
The same can be said about just about anything from Europe at that time: Fiat 128SL, 128 3P, 124 coupe and spyder, and X1/9, any water cooled VW, Renault 17 Gordini. Generally state of the art with enjoyable driving dynamics, with the ownership experience ruined by unreliability and rust.
If anything, the R5, having been introduced, iirc, in 1972, was the most elderly of the lot, drawing suspension from the 1961 R4, and compromised by the old Dauphine drivetrain transplanted to the front.
Renault didn’t really get with the program until the introduction of the R14 in 76, which begs the question, why didn’t Renault bring in the 14, instead of the 5? The 14 was no stunner in the looks department, but no more odd than the 5.
the usual Renault bugaboo of iffy dealers.
And how. By the time I bought my 80, Renault was in the hands of AMC dealers. The last time I darkened their door was for new front brakes. The writeup guy started telling me how “both front calipers are siezed, you need to get new calipers now! the car isn’t safe to drive!!!” But, I thought to myself, how did they get the new pads in if the calipers were siezed? The writeup guy took me back to the mechanic who replaced the pads. The mechanic said he had broken off one of the bleeders. Then the writeup guy says “see? both calipers have to be replaced now!!!!” Figuring one broken bleeder does not equal two siezed calipers, and as the brake pedal didn’t feel squishy, I and my car ran out of there at full chat.
A portion of the failure of the Alliance and Encore was also put on poor dealer shops.
‘course, I could go on a length about the horrible Mercury shop that rarely solved any of the monthly failures in my 78 Zephyr.
A bad joke on your side of the pond. A huge success and very popular on my side for more than 25 years in a row. And therefore the appropriate term would be something like “Typical European rubbish”.
> Whatever their merits (and I’m sure there were some), these were the cars that were a bad joke before the Yugo took that crown.
I imagine it would’ve been an even bigger joke if they’d called it the “Frog” instead of Le Car.
Wasn’t long before the Hyundai Pony succeeded the Yugo / Lada etc in that category.
I don’t know much about Renaults. When I was still very young they were an alternative to the beetle and for that reason are linked with them in my mind. I do know that they appeal to me and for some reason that bothers me. I guess I’m afraid I might do something stupid with my money if given a chance.
The picture with the bundled up girl and the next one just made me think of the VW thing for some reason. I guess I like spartan interiors. If CC keeps featuring articles on new (to me) vehicles I might have to seek counseling. I’m afraid the 5 might push me over the edge on it’s own.
I do know that they appeal to me and for some reason that bothers me.
When I was about 5, I figured Nash Metros were the neatest thing…probably because they were not that much larger than my pedal powered fire engine that I terrorized the neighborhood with.
2stroketurbo, a small car fan on youtube, takes a late 70s LeCar for a spin
A couple of times on Angeles Crest Hwy I saw a white (looked good) R5 with huge tires and fat wheel wells with “TURBO” in huge letters on the side going seriously fast up the hill. Must have been grey market, That was one impressive little rocket.
I have seen that very same car and even have pictures of it. It’s a gray import R5 Turbo 2.
I’ve had three R5s over the years – two of the later transverse-engined models (one a turbo), and one US-spec LeCar. All of them were brilliant basic transport in their own right, but the overall design made them far more than just that.
The fastest car I ever made it completely across Ireland in was a gold 1986 R5 TL with the 1.1-litre engine and (optional) 5-speed gearbox. Most of the drive was on back roads, and in those pre-motorway days (I believe that the sum total of motorways in the Republic were the M7 around Naas, M11, and about 10 miles of the M50 at the time) its size, gearing, and suspension were perfect for blasting along narrow, twisting country lanes. If 86WW469 survived the introduction of the NCT (National Car Test) into the current day, I truly hope its owner is enjoying it as much as I did.
This led to picking up an electric-blue 1987 (D-reg, if I remember correctly) R5 GT Turbo while at University in the UK. Ended up doing my best with the badging and wheels to make it look like a boy racer’s tarted-up 1.1 masquerading as a Turbo; car theft was rife in my area. It did serve to surprise a few of the Max Power crowd once or twice – let them rev their Nova GSi a couple of times, then blip the Renault’s throttle enough to spool up the turbo and watch their faces suddenly become concerned that they might have bitten off more than they had anticipated.
After moving to the US, I picked up a 1977 LeCar. This was one of the limited-edition Black Beauty cars, complete with plaque on the dash giving its number in the limited production run (217 out of 400, if I recall). It made an excellent little L.A. commuter, averaging high-30s fuel economy and being generally quite reliable. Perfect for nice days in Southern California with the vinyl roof opened up, scaring the daylights out of BMW drivers on Angeles Crest or Mulholland Drive by hanging right onto them through the curves was always tremendous fun, even if they left my 48bhp in the dust coming out of them. Getting it through smog proved nigh-on impossible – ’70s emissions control technology was appallingly poorly-engineered, and very much *not* the car’s fault – so after three biannual fail / repair cycles, I sold it as a parts car to a fellow who had four of them.
These were really clever little cars for the time, and I feel have an undeserved reputation for being mechanical nightmares. Like anything else, give it to an indifferent or hostile owner or mechanic and it’ll be a complete pain to live with – but take care of them and they’ll run more or less indefinitely.
By the way, for anyone in the US looking for one: consider importing the later Supercinq bodystyle. 1988 models should now be Federally-eligible for import under the 25-year rule, electrics were improved, and doing clutches on them is much easier due to the transverse engine layout. You’ll still have same the joy of no over-the-counter parts availability as you would with US-model R5s, but at least it’ll be with a more unique version. Oh, and the later diesels (a 1.7-litre unit, if I remember) achieve *phenomenal* fuel economy.
I’m glad your worked out for you. I had a friend who had a 1980 I believe, bought new, and she was on the phone to the garage about needed repairs more than she drove the thing. One time she went to start it up and the driveshaft (or some other major component) fell out the bottom. That one may have been made on a Lundi or Vendredi.
Her friend, (who had a Lada) had somewhat more success with her ride, which says something at least to me.
These folks both had reason to envy others in our group who had a 1965 Chevy, and another with a 1967 Dart, who never had a problem with their vehicles.
Thanks for this Roger,another car from my schooldays.I’d had 2 years of a not well liked(the nicest thing anybody said about her) French teacher who drove an Austin A35.In my 5th year(1973) I found I had a new French teacher who had a yellow Renault 5.She was kind,patient and a great teacher(everything the previous one wasn’t).
The sedan version is just wrong,it should have been drowned at birth.
The correct translation of the French ad would be
” Donc you think I look mean on this photo ”
I , the Renault 5
Great article Roger. I love the interior lounge room shot.
Thanks for the write-up Roger.
These always make me smile when I see them rattling around French back roads – which is still relatively often. The three door especially is a real cutie. I think the last time I saw one in Scotland was back in University, though there are a couple of Supercinq still bimbling around here in Edinburgh.
I think you’re stretching it a bit suggesting nothing approached it for small style until BMW’s MINI rocked up: the 205, the Corsa B, the first Twingo, both generations of Uno, and the K11 Micra all spring immediately to mind as being considered terribly chic at the time they were new, even the dear old Metro got some early 80s fashion love for a brief time.
Nowadays the (European) market is awash with stylish little cars in exactly this mould – I’m a little surprised you weren’t tempted to mention the 5’s spiritual rebirth at this year’s Geneva show in the form of the Twingo III – the resemblence is truly striking.
I don’t know about the UK, but Renault is doing very well here. The new Clio, Captur and Megane (especially the wagon) are everywhere you look. And I’ve got a feeling this new Twingo (rear engine !) might just become their next hotcake.
Quite a few Renaults on UK roads but nowhere near as many as Peugeots and Citroens
I just checked the 2013 sales numbers, the top 5:
1. Volkswagen
2. Renault
3. Ford
4. Peugeot
5. Toyota
I guess Vauxhall and Ford are the UK best sellers ?
I see more Citroens and Peugeots than Renaults where I live.Peugeots are very popular for taxis
Own a 1982 GTL 5-doors, 1.1l, 5-speed.
This is a great little car, very comfy, especially with the GTL and higher trim seats (unfortunatly, my driver’s one is broken, so have to deal with the base low-back seat … pic attached is after repair and before it broke again), with plenty of room when back-seat is folded. I also own a Chrysler-Simca 1978 1307 GLS. Of course, the 1307 is only a 4-speed, but even with its better insulation, at same rpm, it’s way more noisy than the R5.
Those cars were (and still are) really reliable, except for a few details like shift stick guidance (good solution is to modify it with uniball links) and, as most cars of that time, rust …
Rust on those Renault could be pretty annoying … eating rear torsion bars pivots, ending on loosing the rear wheels on a lift, or worse, on the road.
One word of caution for those who never saw an R4, R5 or R6 … never rest on the driver side fender of a freshly stopped one … this is where the muffler lives 😛
Agreed. The only real problem these cars had was the bad rust proofing, that is, till the early eighties. But Renault certainly wasn’t the only one in that era when it came to (a complete lack of) rust proofing.
For the rest, the small Renaults (like the 4 and 5) were technically as dead simple and basic as a motor vehicle can possibly get. They were also the first choice when you needed a small commercial vehicle in the seventies and eighties. Electricians, plumbers, house painters etc., they all belonged to Renault’s clientele.
The five-door version of the 1st-gen Renault 5 got a longer lifespan in Iran where it was known as Saipa and got its rear headlights modified.
http://www.r5gordini.co.uk/forum-mainmenu-90/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1927
http://www.autosavant.com/2008/03/29/renault-le-car-lives-on%E2%80%A6in-iran/
LeFrog are you kidding . The R-5 was a best sellers here in Québec in the mid seventies and is was judicious from Renault to not call them the frog because it was our national nickname when ROC ( rest of canada ) call us . So the 5 was the 5 .
I’m glad they did not choose a somewhat insulting (at least, maybe even discriminatory) nick name. Cinq works well.
Great writeup, Roger. I commented (under the piece about the Peugeot 504) on the joys and sorrows of owning a 1980 LeCar. For me, there was really only one important issue–RUST. The car I ended up with was not the first I owned. That one was totalled when I’d had it for just a few weeks. We were hit headon at about 25 MPH one fine evening; some clown didn’t bother to check oncoming traffic before turning left right in front of us. Crashworthy–that foolish-looking little thing? You bet it was. We did go to the ER that night, but we weren’t there very long. I had a half-inch cut in my scalp, and my beloved (who was driving) caught some shattered glass and suffered a few nicks. We both also came away with a diagonal set of bruises where the seatbelts caught us. That was it. Its replacement was the car in which, on one memorable occasion, we tooled around Houston in the rain, five people plus luggage! The car was great fun in a lot of ways, but it just didn’t hold up after very many salty Midwestern winters.
The Renault 5’s claim to shame is that Bon Scott, the lead singer with AC/DC in the 70s’, died of hypothermia after keeling over at a party in a London suburb and getting stuffed into one parked outside the party, to ‘keep him out of harm’s way’.
I had one, great little car. Like in other parts of the world, this car is beloved by many people in Mexico.
I presently have 2 R5, a 1980 US spec 3 door and a 1986 Canadian spec 3 door.
(Renault brought the R5 MKI into Canada for another 2 years after ceasing importation into the US in 1984)
I have owned many imported cars since my high shool days, (I am now 59), and can truthfully say all in all, these are the best cars i have ever owned.
It is a great design, full of quirky character, and a blast to drive.
I have never seen any automobile that is completely thought out or devoid of flaws in design or buld quality, realities of production schedules and deadlines, and cost consideration, always generate compromises.
If you have to depend on others to do your work, certainly service and dealer network are big issues; if you turn wrenches yourself there is not much outrageous about these cars, or anything that stands out from normal service on a front drive auto.
Roomy, great ride, as mentioned-hilarious but effective handling, revvy, stout motor, great acceleration with the twin choke weber, and lots of hauling room with the easily removable rear seat taken out, just fold it up, slide the pivot bar sideways, and take it out, surprised no one mentioned that feature!
Regardng rust, I worked in the auto body trades in the Northeast USA in the ’70’s and R5 suffered no more or less thah other cars and trucks of the era, domestic or imported. Salted roads ate all metal equally, and smaller cars in general, and unitized body, as opposed to body on frame vehicles, suffered the most.
Oh, if anyone out there knows of a source of NOS sunroof panels I need 2. As an alternative, if anyone out there is from Iran, or has relatives there, perhaps they could help me search there for panels as perhaps fitted to the early iranian produced R5?
I would prefer fit the original or near original item as opposed to having replacements crafted locally
I owned four LeCars, green, red, yellow, all new, and then a tan that I picked up used when I had to have another later in life.
Loved the handling and space inside.
When the tan one was in its death throes in New Orleans, my mechanic, a dedicated Francophile, located in a large tin building brimming with spare parts, told me he had enough new parts and some solid donor chassis that would enable him to build me a new one.
My one regret in life is that I did not take him up on that offer.
What was the name of the shop ? It sounds like a gold mine of spares.
Given the Cleon-Fonte engine was capable of being enlarged to 1.6-litres, why did Renault limited themselves to enlarging the engine to 1.4-litres (notwithstanding the 1.5-1.65-litre Cleon-Alu / A-Type)?
An enlarged Renault 5 Alpine spec engine displacing around 1596cc (as in the 90 hp Volvo 343 Oettinger rather than the similar-sized South American and Dacia versions) would potentially produce around 106 hp, a Renault 5 Alpine Turbo spec engine of the same displacement should put out around 125-126 hp with a later Renault Supercinq GT Turbo unit of the same size possibly putting out around 130-140 hp.
Such an engine even in naturally aspirated form would have certainly benefited the larger Renault 14 and Renault 9/11 models that were both limited to 1.4-litres (the exception being the 11-based Renault Alliance GTA).
As many of us have said many times before:
“Wish I still had mine”
My ’82 was my first-ever new car!
The front end treatment of the early US-market Le Car was awful with big black bumpers and round headlights stuck into holes obviously meant for rectangular lights. I think the Seven was an interesting variation, and as I said in another post, I think Renault should have brought it over to the US.
My first new car was an ’80 LeCar. Beige, brown LeCar stripe, vinyl interior, and the biggest sunroof I’d ever seen. The 80 had rectangular headlights (Cibie Z-Beams dropped right in) and looked better than the earlier US imports. I’ll always remember the day my wife and I took her 6’4 brother and 6’2 girlfriend out to see some covered bridges. Once they got in they had lots of room, but getting in and out of the back seat was, to say the least, comical.
Wonderful seats, fantastic smooth ride.
After a while I needed a larger car so I traded her in on a Renault 18i sedan. You’re so right when you say that with French cars, the smaller ones are the best. I;m sure service would be a nightmare now, but yeah, I wish I still had her.
I remember quite a few “Le Cars” around in the 70’s in Burlington, Vermont, when I was in College (I was driving a Datsun 710 back then). Of course proximity to Quebec province and plenty of French descent Vermonters probably had something to do with it (plus you could still buy a new French car back then). Some Peugeots, and maybe one or two Citroens back then.
I even remember a magazine ad for the Renault 5 that mentioned a police department somewhere in Washington state that used them due to their economy (which of course was a big deal during the fuel crisis and high inflation rate in the US at the time). Wonder if they were as durable as the normal sedans (particularly Mopar) that were staples of the police force back then?
Yes, the great seats seem to be a French trait, like Peugeots which are also known for their great seats. It seems even inexpensive cars come with comfortable seats (do you have to spend a lot to get a comfortable seat?).
I don’t have much recent experience with French cars, being in the US we are denied easy access to them, but we actually got a Peugeot 505 rental from Hertz back in 1985 (Newark Airport) and my Father owned a Renault 10 (twice the 5?) 50 years ago, bought in 1968, and it had wonderful seats and great visibility (kind of like the 70s-80s Hondas). And it even had 4 doors, though storage wasn’t so great in the front trunk (it was the first “2nd car” in my family that was bought new).
I toyed with the thought of buying one of these back in the day. I was just recovering from a huge hole in the wallet that was branded as a Fiat, and did not want to jump from the frying pan into the fire.
I always wondered why cars like the R5 and the Fiats were so successful and revered in Europe but reviled here. Some of us wondered if Europeans simply expected less from their cars in terms of quality and reliability but looking back at the Pintos, Vegas, Gremlins, and even the Escorts and Chevettes that succeeded them, were they really any worse than the competition? Even Rabbits and Sciroccos had quality problems early on.
Only the Japanese really put the rest on the trailer, and even they struggled with rust issues.
It’s been said that poor product support did the French in, both Renault and Peugeot, and given the problems everybody else had, that has to be the case.
Don’t underestimate the national pride in France, Italy and Germany for their car brands, the suitability of the cars for the markets and (especially France, Italy for example) the affordability a compact car like the 5 or Fiat 127 offered.
Product support for Renault in France would be no issue – an agent in every town, even if he was only a service agent
Ive seen one or two of these I guess they were sold here though in numbers of I have no idea other French brands are more common, I drive one so I notice them.
First of all, a fair number of imports to the USA had options that were not common in Europe, like automatic transmissions and air conditioning. These put a burden on engines that were already hampered by US emission laws. Second of all, the Japanese did their homework pretty well when it came to modifying their cars to meet US regulations. Many of the European makers didn’t do so well, particularly the French and Italians. The Germans and the Swedes did better.
CC Effect (ish)
Today in St Paul
I had the pleasure of owning two Le Cars in the eighties. I lived in Northern Wisconsin at the time and these cars were excellent in the snow. Lots of ground clearance. I remember pushing 12 inches of fresh snow to get to work at UPS. They were fun to drive and fairly reliable. But the rust! Even the bondo had bondo.
I’ve often thought that with this engine setup Renault used on their early FWD cars, they could accurately be called mid-engined, as the engine weight is entirely within the wheelbase. Anyone have any opinions as to whether this improved the driving any?
My first new car. Bright yellow, with Le Car on it. Bought and paid for all by myself. Question, Mine was probably a 1978. I think I remember a choke and that the ignition was to the left of the steering wheel???
I bought a 1980 Renault 5 in college from my chemistry prof. He took a sabbatical in France that summer and had the car US-cert’d and imported only for his wife to forbid his driving it in Houston traffic! It was a beautiful deep blue, not available here, and thank the Lord, didn’t have that awful tape striping. Euro Philips radio and the long black rubber roof. I drove it for over 100K miles with only a replacement alternator at about 90K miles. Worst thing was the rear side windows were hinged with glued hinges, and the glue would routinely fail. Never could find a glue to fix it. I’d have bought another one if they’d still been importing them. My favorite car in 50 years of ownership.