(Submitted by Stephane)
Ever wonder what form the Alliance would’ve taken if AMC survived? If so, say bonjour to the Renault 19! Though disappearing in number, this late production cabriolet provides a glimpse into an alternative future in which Kenosha’s French transplant hung on for a second round of battling Japan’s and Germany’s finest.
Sold in Europe from 1988 to 1997 (and until the end of 1999 for the South American market), the 19 was the final Renault to receive numeric nomenclature, serving as La Regie’s C-segment placeholder until the Megane hit the scene.
A facelift in 1991 prolonged the 19’s life, but its basic platform, evolved from the Renault 9 and Renault 11 models it replaced, would also underpin the first generation Megane, which was built until 2003. Thus, using the Alliance’s and Encore’s chassis did the R19, assembled in automated factories (notably the Douai facility in Northern France), provide the French company its third chance to do battle in the post-Golf European marketplace.
Despite styling largely dismissed as banal, the R19 actually represented a step forward for Renault in terms of higher build quality, and became Europe’s top-selling small family car in 1989 and 1990, bettering Wolfsburg’s best efforts to hawk its aging second-generation stalwart.
Like the Golf, Astra and Escort, Renault released four-door and topless versions of the R19, aiming to match its C-segment rivals model for model in an increasingly liberalized European marketplace. Picture these two models parked alongside a Renault Medallion and Premier, and you can easily imagine how it might have looked with four domestic automakers battling for the affections of American compact car drivers, especially in the Midwest.
As with the Mk3 VW Golf, the R19 convertible was sold alongside its late ’90s successor, soldiering on until 1997. By that time, the nationalized automaker (the National Company Renault or “La Régie Nationale des usines Renault”) was privatized, and numeric model names were abandoned, providing a politically neutral way to publicize the company’s new direction.
The R19’s genesis began, of course, well before any changes at the top with the X-53 project of 1984. The objective of the X-53 was to explore ways of designing, engineering and producing a competitive C-segment sedan using the most modern CAD (Computer Aided Design) technology and, for the first time, CNC (Computer Aided Manufacturing) machinery. In only a few weeks’ time, the X-53 had been officially renamed Renault 19. Testing continued for some 7.5 million simulated miles over the next several years, making heavy use of digital modelling before “in the flesh” testing in extreme weather conditions and temperatures. With the Alliance initially selling well, North American conditions factored heavily into the new R19’s design, even though the car never made it across the pond.
Renault studied three new engines for use in their latest family car: a petrol-fueled “Energy” 1.4-liter, 80-hp, a 1.8-liter, 16-valve variant, and a 1.9-liter, 65-hp diesel. Other engines would follow, including a 1.9-liter, 90-hp turbodiesel, representing the peak of indirect injection diesel technology for passenger cars.
Despite the stateside appearance of the Alliance convertible, Renault remained absent from the European convertible market following the 1968 demise of the Caravelle and Floride. But with VW and Ford peddling topless conversions of the Golf and Escort, Renault decided to chase the latest batch of convertible buyers seeking practical front-drive, al fresco motoring by offering a topless version of the R19.
Whatever Renault might have buyers believe, it would appear the convertible was a secondary development as it wasn’t until July ’91 when it was finally launched. Produced by the German coach builder Karmann, the convertible retained the 19’s primary mechanical characteristics, but added a higher level of equipment to emphasize its different market position. Two petrol engines were available: the 16-valve 1.8 and an eight-valve variant with 92-hp. No diesels were offered. Unlike the sedan, the convertible was well equipped (by French standards, mind you), with standard power steering, brakes, electric windows, locks and mirrors, an engine immobilizer, air conditioning, leather and, inexplicably, a manual-folding top, even though a power-operated top had been standard on the US-market Alliance.
Housed in a reinforced unibody, the R19 convertible did without the roll-bar favored by VW and Ford, helping keep its lines clean and lean. Around 25,000 were produced from 1991 until 1997 before the less-roomy Megane cabriolet took its place.
Of course, the R19 story wouldn’t be complete without mention of the 16S, which did battle with the Peugeot 309 GTI and VW Golf GTI. With the same 1.8 liter, 137 horsepower (140, sans catalyst) engine as offered in the convertible, the 16S embraced the successful naturally aspirated, multivalve four-cylinder approach to hot hatch power that VW was slowly abandoning. This engine would achieve even greater fame in two-liter form, in the Clio Williams. Despite being criticized for its dull style and cheap interior, the 16S distinguished itself with ample midrange torque, generous standard equipment and a characteristically pliant, Gallic chassis tune.
So, despite erring on the conservative side, this seemingly mundane French family hatch both represents the end of Renault’s period as a state-owned enterprise and its fading hopes of being a mainstream US market player. Do you think the R19 would’ve had what it would take to keep AMC viable or would it have gone down as yet another notoriously fragile Franco-American scheme?
Related reading: Renault Alliance and Renault Medallion
A relative had one of these, 1.9 auto sedan. The autos are apparently a ticking time bomb which explains why its trade in value at 10 years old with fairly low mileage was $300. Excljuding the gearbox, a thoroughly unremarkable car.
Looking at the back end of the sedan, surely the US model would’ve had a bumper-mounted license plate…
The 5-door is the most attractive, but most likely would be the rarest here and may well have bowed out of the Kenosha assembly line early. That being said, the sedan’s reasonably attractive while subsequent Renault sedans have all been blatantly hatchbacks with a trunk tacked on.
I had 2 – a 1990 1.4 carburettor petrol and a 1993 1.4 fuel injection. Both were the 5 door hatch. Not necessarily as memorable as some but more capable than some accounts would have you believe and easily as good in everyday use as any other mainstream European or Japanese competitor of the time. The second one did a very dependable 132000 miles.
Best parts were the comfort and the cruising ability, with better than expected handling.
Worst parts were the cooling system (££££) and the fact that they weren’t as strong as Volvo 740 estates in “user centred active resilience testing situations”.
And don’t forget that the styling was by Giugiaro
Maybe that explains why I like it–a little plain, perhaps, but attractive in a folded-paper sort of way. The refresh was pretty bad though; that photo reminds me of a Ford Aspire.
This kinda weather (Sunny Northern Europe) whole flocks of them come out.
Good cars.
Simply a good car, wearing the Karmann name with French pride !
@ Roger yes, the 19 was sensitive for cooling problems and ‘stuff’would block the heating radiator.
Trick was to renew the cooling liquid every year !
Thanks for this closer look at a car that is totally foreign to me except for seeing them on the Streets in France on our visit there. I’d forgotten that they were still based on the 9/11. I shot one of those 19 Convertibles in Paris, as it’s a rather distinctive looking car, in terms of it solution to having its top chopped.
In terms of answering the question as to how these would have fared in the US, I don’t think it needs much imagination to see them be disasters, sales-wise. The Alliance/Encore did well the first year or two, then dropped badlly, and the Medallion (R21) was a total disaster. Everyone was in love with Japanese cars, and in hate with French cars.
Better yet, the first Mégane was little more than a reskinned R19. That early 80s platform held up well!
Hi,
In Europe, the R11, the R9 and mainly the R21 were a total success: reliable and popular. The R21 is still common on the road however others (R9 and R11) become rare.
I’m really sorry that the U.S. versions were disasters, perhaps they have not been enough studied to this market? …
sincerly yours
Hi Stephane,
probably the prime reason why Renault and many other European brands failed in North America is the different car tradition. European cars were designed and most commonly sold in bare-bones versions, designed for our much shorter but narrower, twistier roads. The cars work (reasonably) well like that with their light weight, firm handling, small engines and overall size.
In NA however, car expectations are different: much better equipped, fuel injection, automatic gearbox, things the cars weren’t optimised for. These additions were often not fully developed (since in the home market nobody cared), would break often and put a strain on the good components. Example: the Peugeot 504 was (supposedly) indestructible in its original incarnation but the American version with its autobox and aircon was terrible. The Renault Alliance was never intended to drive very long distances and its engine, not the same one as in Europe and not very good to begin with was strangled by faulty fuel injection.
Couple that to poor brand recognition and presence, a different attitude to small cars, hefty competition from the Japanese who did do their homework, practically every European brand failed back then. Today’s circumstances are different.
My mum’s late model R21 Nevada 1.7 wasn’t particularly reliable though, and neither was my aunt’s Renault engined Volvo 440. My experience is that Renaults of those could and did last long, but not without issues. Issues American buyers refused to put up with.
Hi BeWo !
You’re right , European cars have not been studied enough for the American market.
It is true that French cars are designed with a very different idea.
First, most European (mainly French , Spanish , Italian and English ) do not like to drive automatic cars, it is a tradition so ingrained that used automatic cars can not be sold easily .
Only German brands occupy this segment.
Second, the price of fuel , due to the various taxes on petroleum products, is much more expensive than in the united states . For example, in France today the price of one liter of unleaded petrol is U.S. $ 2.20 ! (more than $ 8 a gallon !)
It is unthinkable to drive a car that consumes 20 liters per hundred kilometers as the American cars . That is why the European drivers are fascinated by the Cadillacs , Buicks and other . They dream but can not have one.
thirdly, Europe imposed automakers stringent emissions standards. Engines equipped with a series of filters are smaller and have less performance than the American engines. Moreover, the automaker Ford has difficulties on the reliability of its engines for the French market because of these standards.
It seems unthinkable, but a French purchasing a new car with a powerful engine, which consumes a lot of fuel, must pay an additional fee that can reach by car model, more than 800 dollars. Cars must be light .
I love American cars, a week ago, a convertible 1964 cadillac DeVille went on my street, all eyes turned to her, and I heard people say how do they park with that!
I couldn’t agree more with your last sentence. I had friends with Honda’s who swore they’d never buy anything else, yet my humble Renault GTA (based on the R9) had far fewer mechanical and rust issues than their cars, while being a lot more fun to drive. As for he Medallion being a sales disaster (and the Premier as well), true, they weren’t aiming for the centre of the market, but poor sales were more a function of Chrysler basically abandoning them rather than a comment on their reliability. Chrysler purchased AMC for Jeep and was too busy trying to sell every SUV they could get out the door than to bother selling any Renaults, which took sales away from their small cars. They couldn’t get out of their arrangement to sell any more Renaults fast enough, penalties or not.
My father had a 4-door version with the small 1.9 65 hp. It was really a good car that did a very respectable 430000 kilometers without any problems but I must still specify that my father has always respected the maintenance schedule of the car.
It’s true that many drivers had problems with that “damn” car but i didn’t.
petrol engines are better, particularly the engine that powered the early versions: the 1.7 injection (like the R21’s one) and indestructible 1.4 “energy” Cleon-iron.
I have the convertible appearing on the pictures, the green one , called “vert Anglais”.
It’s a marvellous car that is gradually disappearing roads. mine is the only one for miles around.
How much does it still exist?
I LOVE the R19.
Me too… It’s the best car Renault has ever built since 1988!
When you drive it, you love it.!
I always liked the Alliance convertible – and the R19 cabrio looks like the most logical evolution of it. Quite elegant and restrained – it wears the years very well, which isn’t true of just about every other early-mid 90s car.
This is a very interesting “what if.” Those little convertibles look like a lot of fun… It’s pretty sad that the French manufacturers have given up on importing cars to the US.
I truly like Renault ever since our family had R4’s. (I stumbled on CC by way of googling for R4). If I stayed in Germany rather than moving to the US I certainly considered Renault for my set of wheels. However, here in the US the French names Renault and Peugeot were damaged goods and the Alliance did not help it. It was too rough running and most importantly too unreliable in comparison to the Japanese imports. They beat Yugo.
No, I don’t think the R19 would have had a chance against this back drop.
only after travelling for thousands of reliable miles in unbelievable comfort on treacherous dirt roads at unbelievable speeds do you really appreciate how Renault R19’s WERE SO FAR AHEAD OF THEIR TIME!! WILL EASILY DO 160KPH ALL DAY, THE HANDLING IS FANTASTIC, I’VE OWNED EVERY CAR IN THE BOOK! STILL LOVE MY RENAULT’S EVEN AFTER OWNING 50 OF ‘EM, GO THE RENO!!