(First Posted September 14, 2013) What do you consider to be the most significant car of the 1980s? Plymouth Voyager/Dodge Caravan? Renault Espace? Mercedes-Benz 190E? GM J-car or X-car? Chrysler K-car? The first FWD Ford Escort? BMW M3? Audi 100 C3? Mazda MX-5? Paul Niedermeyer might suggest (and make an eloquent case for) the Mercedes-Benz 300E, but have you considered the Peugeot 205?
To mark the 30th anniversary of one of Europe’s best-ever cars, here are five reasons it might have been the most significant car of the 1980s.
1 – A supermini that looked so good it couldn’t be face lifted
In retrospect, few cars look better after a facelift, which didn’t matter in the case of the 205 – it was effectively never facelifted beyond changing the colors of the front indicators and rear light clusters, and giving it different wheel trims. It didn’t need anything more, simple as that.
Exhibit A: Good looks
Until 1983, there had not been a good looking supermini–at least, not a really good looking one. That was dictated by size and budget constraints–there was not sufficient length for elegant proportions, and the accountants insisted on flat-glass rear screens. The 205 was the first good looking, almost elegant supermini, one you could buy instead of the next larger-size car whilst not signalling you were constrained by budget. Compare it to any supermini that preceded it–not to mention many that came later–and you’ll see what I mean.
Exhibit B: Good to drive
In the 1970s, you didn’t really want to drive a supermini very far. Some, such as the Renault 5 and Fiat 127, were good for short urban jaunts, and obviously handy in tight spaces–but you weren’t terribly keen on a motorway run. The 205 changed that – it was just as good as always in the urban environment, but was also motorway capable. Better still, it was adept, agile and enjoyable on open roads whilst boasting a comfortable ride (it was French, of course). It was good to drive, and be to be driven in, at a level that was another first for the size.
Exhibit C: It brought diesel power to the mainstream
Before the mid 1980s, diesel engines were the preserve of taxi drivers, delivery men and those for whom longevity heavily outweighed performance and noise issues. The 205, along with other such Peugeot-Citroen cars as the BX and the later 405, led the change in perception that eventually resulted in diesel power becoming the preference of most of Europe–including the UK, where diesel fuel costs more than petrol (gas). The keys to change included (of course) improved fuel economy, but also the surprising performance from the greater torque of the diesel engines.
Exhibit D: It was the best hot hatch of all time.
There are two outstanding candidates for the best hot hatchback of all time: the VW Golf GTi, and the Peugeot 205GTi. The Golf came first, and thus is considered to have defined the breed. But, as is often true, the second interpretation was better, in this case being the 205GTi. It had a 107 HP, 1.6-liter engine, five-speed gearbox, wider wheels and tires, lowered and tautened suspension and the usual sport trim. The key distinction was that it was more compact than the Golf, especially in its later, larger Mk2 form, and was possessed of a more immediate, more communicative chassis and lighter weight (well under a ton). All these combined for one of the greatest driving enjoyment experiences of the time–and one that remains a benchmark, not necessarily for outright performance or grip, but for the combination of performance, communication and pure entertainment. You had to watch it at the limit, though. The GTi was the basis for a Championship-winning World Rally Car and the Pikes Peak cars.
Exhibit E: It set the size template for the modern supermini.
In 1983, the then-current Ford Fiesta had a wheelbase of 90″ but the 205 came in at 96″ –even longer than a contemporary Escort. Today’s Fiesta has a wheelbase of 98″; the 208, the 205’s successor three times over, has a wheelbase of 99″. The Supermini has grown up in the last 30 years, following and hewing closely to the formula that started with the 205. Incidentally, the 1988 Fiesta aped the styling of the 205, but only closely enough to make you you realize how “right” the 205 was visually. There’s no question which design has better stood the test of time.
The 205 was produced from 1983 until 1996 in France, and until 1999 in Argentina. Like many Peugeots, it was not revolutionary, but featured what we might call properly thought-out competence.
Engines ranged from 954 cc to 1905 cc petrol engines: Initially, the 1984 GTi came with a 104 HP, 1.6-liter offering around 110 mph, and later as a 1.9-liter version with even stronger performance. Various models in some markets used petrol engines acquired by Peugeot in the Chrysler Europe merger in 1978. Diesel engines were the familiar Peugeot-Citroen XUD units, which were used throughout the 1980s and 1990s in the whole range of Peugeot and Citroen cars and also sold to other brands.
The 205 used MacPherson struts at the front and a torsion-bar rear suspension, as first seen on the Peugeot 305 estate in 1977. The setup was very compact, with little suspension intrusion into the boot, thus providing both a wide,flat load space and excellent ride and handling.
And how did Peugeot follow the 205? They tried a pincer movement with the smaller 106 and the larger 306, but neither of these could actually replace the 205.
Most of the cars shown on this blog were seen recently in southwest France, an area with a generally warm climate and little or no road salt, which helps with preservation. However, there are few better places for spotting such CC gems than rural France, where a car is seen as a tool to be replaced when it absolutely must be, and not when new-car advertising starts to work. And don’t worry about their body damage–light panel damage is actually part of the French vehicle registration process.
I give you the Peugeot 205, then, as a candidate for the Most Significant Car of the 1980s: a car that set class standards for size and style, was great to drive, won the World Rally Championship, climbed Pikes Peak and couldn’t be face-lifted, never mind replaced. That’s quite a list when you consider it.
I think you have to look at from the perspective of what was the most significant car from a particular continent. In North America, it would be down to the Caravan and the Ford Taurus. I think it would have to be the Taurus.
The Caravan was iconic in being our first real minivan, but since that segment has pretty much gone stale, the Taurus wins it for me. Sales wise, midsize sedans are second only to pickups in overall sales in the US, and the Taurus absolutely defined what we expect from a modern FWD, midsize sedan in America. The gulf between the Taurus and the competition upon its debut was as large a lead as any car ever had. It was over a decade ahead of GM’s midsizers. It quickly became obsolete compared to the Japanese, but every Accord, Altima, Fusion, etc owes it success in the US to the Taurus’s formula.
I didn’t get it, at first, with the lead-in pics being the 4-dr. versions. Methinks, “Isn’t this just another page from the Rabbit / Omnirizon play book?
Farther down, though, the coupe version really grabbed my attention. Way cool!
Sounds like we didn’t get these in the States. Our loss, perhaps?
I think you have that backwards the Taurus was an attempt by Ford to compete with the larger Japanese/European sedans it copied them, the formula was already there for Ford to copy years after FWD had been done better by others.
No, not just the FWD, the overall car. The Taurus was the first aerodynamic mainstream car sold in the US. Look at an 1986 Taurus, then any 1986 Toyota, Honda, Mercedes or BMW. All the European and Japanese cars look positively ancient by comparison. Hell, look at an 1986 Aussie Falcon. It looks like it has more in common with the Model T than a modern car in comparison to a 1986 Taurus. Like I said, the Taurus was outclassed within a decade, but initially, it was earth shattering in the US.
I’ll refer you to the Wikipedia section citing all the awards the first generation Taurus won, as well as all the innovations and firsts it brought to the auto industry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Taurus_%28first_generation%29#Reception
Or if that’s not sufficient, here’s an entire book detailing why your off the cuff prejudices are, once again, completely baseless:
http://www.amazon.com/Taurus-Making-That-Saved-Ford/dp/0525933727
Ltd: Did you manage to forget the 1981 Audi C3 (5000/100)? It came out four years before the Taurus, and needless to say, it’s all too obvious that the Taurus was very heavily inspired by it, if not a down-right rip off.
Also, the Mercedes W124 (1984) was highly aerodynamic (more so than the Taurus) and beat it by two years.
The Taurus was an important car, as the first modern American aerodynamic sedan, but don’t overstate its originality. or neglect its inspirations.
Yeah, but considering it’s impact (over 200k sold in first year in US), combined with several unique innovations, I think is essential in considering most significant. The Tucker was extremely innovative, but not very significant.
Speaking of highly aerodynamic 4 door sedans, don’t forget the 1967 NSU Ro 80.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Nsu-ro-80-1.jpg
My Ford blinders are on too. 81 Sierra, 83 Thunderbird, 84 Tempo, and 86 Taurus. Ford suddenly figured out what modern cars needed to look like.
However, I do agree that the 5000 was mind blowingly futuristic. Especially when you consider the AMC Eagle was the American functional equivalent.
Props also to the 1982 Mazda 626. Very forward.
Jabroni: There’s no question that Ford committed themselves to aerodynamics starting with the Sierra. And other manufacturers were there too, even earlier.
But when it comes to setting the template for the mid-full size FWD aerodynamic sedan, the Audi C3 got there several years earlier than the Taurus, and beat it handily in terms of actual aerodynamic performance (CD 0.30 to 0.32)
paul is 100% right about the taurus. when the audi 5000 appeared there was nothing else like it. it seemed to have come from the future. aside from the bauhaus form follows function styling, there was the flush aerodynamic windows and the airplane style door frames and best of all, no chrome trim! the ford taurus was obviously a knock off but a great knock off and you know the mantra, “great artists steal.” to build an audi 5000 at a ford price was a major accomplishment. i loved some of the details like the ford emblem that was also an air intake on the front grill. the simplicity of the dashboard layout was so refreshing in an american car of that era. the wagon version was great. it even had nets in the cargo area. the taurus made every other american midsize car obsolete the day it launched. trading in a ford granada for a taurus was like the day your father stopped wearing a hat or stopped smoking a pipe, the modern world began then.
Paul, don’t forget that Ford may have cribbed the body shape from the Audi, but outright rip off doesn’t account for differences like longitudinal vs. transverse powertrain. Cantilivering the engine over the front or rear axle remains a strangely German pursuit, with Subaru remaining a notable foreign adherent. 60 degree pushrod V6 versus inline 5 Illustrates that the coercive market/demand for efficiency forces had yet to take full effect and different approaches remained viable in those days.
Here’s a 1986 Taurus
1986 Camry
1986 Chrysler Lebaron
1986 Chevrolet Celebrity
So, compared to it’s actual competition in the US, you can see how ground breaking it was. And lets not forget this extended to the inside and underneath too. A 1986 Taurus might not be the ultimate in comfort and style today, but compared to a K-car, or any of its competition in the US at the time it was debuted, it was as different as a prop and jet powered aircraft.
And here’s the Taurus and the Audi. How original was the Taurus? And are you not giving the Audi credit for influencing so many other designs around the world? How do you know everyone was just copying the Taurus instead of the Audi? The Audi C3 is universally given credit for defining the modern sedan, Taurus included. Please take your (Ford) blinders off.
No disrespect intended Paul, but the Wikipedia article I cited clearly references the Audi as design inspiration. And again, having features in an Audi that sells in the hundreds in the US, as opposed to the Taurus goes along way to being significant, not just being first. Notice the article even says “The Taurus is credited with bringing many new design features into the mainstream marketplace”, emphasis on mainstream.
I’ve never owned a Ford product, or have any real biases with them. It’s just my opinion, as well as others (USA Today put the 1st gen Taurus at #6 of most significant cars.) I
Eh,,,, don’t go too far there, the Taurus, mechanics wise, was just catching up to what a V6 X-car was in 1980.
Ltd: I don’t read wiki articles for the opinions cited there. I may check them out for facts, but many articles are written by…fanboys.
Don’t get me wrong: I fully credit the Taurus for what it was, and what a fine job Ford did with it in its final execution. But it was not original.
And your comment that Audi 5000s were selling ” in the hundreds” is a gross mistake. Were you around then? The 5000 was a very popular car in the US before the horrible 60 minutes UA incident; that set back Audi sales for 15 years. But before that happened, Audi was on a major roll in the US. Not quite Taurus numbers, obviously, but it was the fastest-growing premium impost car at the time.
Which is exactly why the whole UA incident happened: Americans who weren’t used to the off-set pedal arrangement had been snapping them up, and then stepping on the wrong pedal.
Anyway, to shortchange the Audi’s role would be a big mistake. Here’s my CC on the Audi C3: https://www.curbsideclassic.com/curbside-classics-european/curbside-classic-1983-1991-audi-5000100-c3-a-picturebook-story-of-the-very-model-of-the-modern-car/
Besides that “60 Minutes” story, there was another elephant in the room, the fact that the 5000’s were garbage reliability wise, yeah Casaba Chedder loved to hump the crap out of them in Can & Drivel, but talk to anyone that owned one, they spent more time in a Audi service departments than on the road, they make GM diesels almost seem reliable.
Yes it apes the Ford Telstar, a rebadged Mazda 626, I’m not denying it was modern it was a good facsimilie of already existing cars and the Falcon gained that look in 87 it was merely the corporate look of Ford at the time but by no means the cutting edge of technology that crown belongs to others.
I gotcha Paul, my intent was never to shortchange any particular car. in 1986 I would have been 3, so admittedly, my car opinions were a bit green…
One of my dads good friends actually had an Audi 5000 in their lovely pearl white that I LOVED. I had only lived in OK and SC at this point, neither places big Audi stomping grounds, to say the least. This was the first one I’d seen in person and just fell for it (this would be circa 1989). And yeah, hundreds was maybe a bit hyperbolic.
And I get not reading wiki’s opinions, but you can’t deny some of the 1st gen accolades, MT’s COTY, etc. The Henry Ford Museum (yes, I see that last name…) has a static display of the Taurus and Caravan as the most significant automobiles of the 1980’s in the US.
My whole point was just that the Taurus established, from a sales perspective, that once and for all a family car in the US was going to be midsized, FWD, aero sedan, and with smaller engines.
I don’t even necessarily agree that the Taurus was the car that got Americans into “aerodynamic looking” cars. There were already 560,000 Tempo FOUR DOOR sedans sold by the time the Taurus hit the streets. Also, don’t forget that it took some time for Taurus sales to get going, not until Ford could get enough of the V6’s in them did they really start moving off the showroom floor. Did you know that Chevrolet sold 404,000 Celebrities during the Taurus’ first year? I largely agree with what Paul and Jabroni touch upon on this topic.
The first gen Tempo didn’t have flush mount headlights or windows, not until the 1986 redesign.
From Edmunds in picking the Taurus as the most SIGNIFICANT (not best, best selling, one I’d most want to own, etc) vehicle of 1986:
“If the mid-’70s through the mid-’80s were the “dark ages” of the American automobile, the 1986 Ford Taurus could arguably be called the start of America’s automotive “renaissance.” For the first time in more than a decade an all-new domestic car entered showrooms with a sense of excitement and anticipation. The Taurus’ sleek styling and functional interior also gave family sedan and wagon shoppers an emotion they hadn’t experienced in quite some time: desire. Using front-wheel drive and flush-mounted headlights and offering either a four-speed automatic or five-speed manual transmission, the Taurus was a fully modern, highly competitive sedan that put Ford toe-to-toe with the Japanese competition of the day (Accord/Camry). The first redesign came in 1992, and from 1992 through 1995 it was the best-selling car in America — a title no domestic automobile has held since.”
I hear a lot of criticism of the Taurus, but no suggestions as to what was more significant in the US in the 1980’s. I fully conceded the Caravan and Taurus are nearly tied, but does anyone have any other suggestions?
“If the mid-’70s through the mid-’80s were the “dark ages” of the American automobile, the 1986 Ford Taurus could arguably be called the start of America’s automotive “renaissance.”
I would say that it was the start of Ford not sliding into bankruptcy.
The first-generation Taurus was undoubtedly important to Ford in the United States. It was not particularly important for the rest of the auto industry. It has had no lasting influence on anyone outside of Ford, and for that matter, it didn’t take Ford very long to lose the plot again not long thereafter.
The GM A-bodies were FWD and not quite as bulky as their predecessors. The Chrysler K-cars were already FWD. So that aspect of the Taurus wasn’t original.
As noted, the styling concepts came from Audi. Nothing wrong with that, but it obviously wasn’t original.
The Chrysler minivans were significant because they had a lasting impact on the industry as a whole. The move to higher vehicles today can be traced back to that particular design of three decades ago. The Taurus can’t claim anything like that.
If anything, the Honda Accords of the 80s were more important than the Taurus, as they marked the transition of Americans out of full-size domestic sedans and into Japanese midsizes. Detroit has never really recovered from that — the days of the high-volume large family sedan were about to end, permanently, and the Accord played a significant role in that.
Yes, the A-body’s and K-cars were FWD, but they were positively ancient by comparison. It was significant because of, like Jabroni said, the number of people that went from a Granada or some other late 70’s, early 80’s domestic RWD car with a metal dash, to a Taurus. It was very significant for the number of people that had a Taurus as their first “modern” car.
I agree with you about the Accord, but in terms of a switch towards smaller Japanese and import cars as family vehicles, and not just for fringe enthusiasts, that started happening in the late 70’s during the gas crisis. It was those same people that were buying Civics and Corolla’s in the 70’s that started buying the more modern Camry’s and Accords in the later 80’s. For instance, my family bought a new for 1990 Accord in 1989, but it was to replace a 1984 VW Jetta as a family car, we were never the Taurus’s conquest market.
The Taurus introduced modernity to the domestic car buying public, which in 1986, was a huge chunk of the market. Your choices in a medium sized midwestern town, where domestic might have been the only option for a new car dealership, were limited to an Impala/Celebrity, or a Crown Victoria/Taurus, or any K-Car. This is how the Taurus had a huge impact in the US, and how it changed what a huge number of Americans expect a car to look and drive like.
“The Taurus introduced modernity to the domestic car buying public”
The public was already starting to move away from domestics and towards imports, a trend that had come at Ford’s expense. Ford was just trying to play catch-up.
I think that you’re attaching far too much importance to what was merely a styling change, and then just for one company.
Styling trends go in waves. For a while, the rounded look was in vogue, until it wasn’t. The Taurus was nothing like the Mustang, which spawned an entire segment that has endured for almost five decades.
And not only did they catch up, for a few years the Taurus was a much more modern car than the Japanese competition even. It wasn’t until the 1988 Camry and 1990 Accord came out that the Japanese had a family car that was competitive with the Taurus.
The Taurus was much more than a styling change, the differences between the 1985 LTD and the 1986 Taurus are as fundamental as it gets. Primarily V8, RWD, chrome slathered boat, vs FWD, primarily V6, with flush lights, windows, bumpers, and handling comparable to the import competition, everything we expect of a modern sedan.
I spent some time behind the wheel of a high mileage, but well maintained 1987 Taurus LX wagon a couple years back, and it was like a brand new car compared the domestic competition of that generation that I’ve driven, which is several K-car variations (Shadow, Acclaim, 600), and Buick, Oldsmobile and Pontiac A-bodies, even through their 90’s variants. Even the W bodies I’ve driven, which came out in 1988 are far “older” cars than a 1986 Taurus today.
To paraphrase the late Llyod Bentsen: “Sen LTD, I had a C3 Audi 200 Turbo, I knew the C3. A Ford Taurus was no C3.”
Caveats:
– The Ford was revolutionary as a modern American car and well ahead of its domestic rivals, no doubt.
– The Audi did suffer similar reliability issues as many contemporary German cars, especially its VW cousins. The electrics and (automatic) gearboxes were particularly stupid.
– Now can we get back to the Pug 205, the original point of the post?
I should have included the clip / context of that joke for our friends outside the US. From the 1988 Vice Presidential Debate:
1988 VP Debate : https://youtu.be/QYAZkczhdMs
The bubble shape of the Taurus came from the Audi 5000.
The size of the Taurus was normal for American cars at that time.
Automakers were already making the move en masse to front-wheel drive, so that wasn’t particularly trend setting, either.
The Taurus was important for Ford, and then just in the US. It wasn’t even an important car for Ford outside of North America, and it wasn’t otherwise that unique.
The Taurus was symbolic of Don Peterson’s leadership, and a step forward for the company. (It was also a Hail Mary since the company was in trouble at the time.) But the Taurus didn’t fundamentally change the rest of the industry.
Yeah Ford was in deep shit at the time that was why Ford Australia was threatened with closure over the incredible warranty claims on the underdeveeloped EA Falcon. Ford imported the Taurus to show how cars should be built but it was rubbish and derided by the motoring press at the time as being dynamicly incompetent, it was a sales disaster and was quietly with drawn now it will reappear with the demise of the falcon I hope the new one has improved or is at least as good as the Mondeo though thats unlikely. The diesel Fords from Europe use Peugeot powertrains as does the diesel BMW Mini and Jaguars so Ford leads WHO?
Keep in mind you guys got the goofy-looking third-gen, not the cleanly styled original. The gen1 Taurus was handsome in both sedan and wagon form. I remember seeing tons of them as a child in the ’80s.
And even the 1996-07 gen3/gen4 models were well made and reliable with the Vulcan V6. We had 2001-07 models as company cars and drove them to 125,000 miles (over 200,000 km) with little more than tires, brakes and gas. And the ones the investigators used were driven hard–Chicago traffic, Chicago parking, country roads, alleys, you name it. But they just kept ticking along.
I wonder what you guys would have said in 2013 if I’d told you Ford stopped making the Taurus a few months ago?
The 205 saved Peugeot from going bankrupt in the early eighties. The 205 GTi was the one and only successor of the VW Golf GTI Mk1. It was a tricky little bomb though, especially the 1.9 GTi.
I really like the current 208 model, and of course there’s a GTi again, 200 hp these days.
The French were and are Master Builders of small hot hatches.
PSA build the best cornering hatches on the planet nothing is better Ask Rally champion Sebastian loeb
Although a couple of months ago, someone sent me a link to an online video that was 12 solid minutes of 205s (most of them in rally dress, it should be said) overcooking it in fast turns and tending up in the weeds. Admittedly, you can overdo it in any car, but the 205 GTi has a reputation for biting back if mishandled; the lesser models, which had less rear roll stiffness, were more forgiving.
I agree so deeply. My frist car was a Peugeot 205 Roland Garros… It was basically the GT version with leather, A/C and all electric.
The engine was awesome and easy to work on: 1360cc, double barrel carburator, 80 HP. However, since I was young and stupid and I was too blinded by all the extras, I didn’t realize this car came from a serious accident, so the front part shaked from 90 to 120 km/h … Then, it was also a gasoline version so it had to go.
I seriously considered buying the last version of this car (January 1999), but I finally bought an Ibiza TDI because of the engine, a cool VW 90hp compared to the measer 70 of the Peugeot.
The thing I remember the most is how airy the cabin was. As you can see, because of the low beltline.It is something remarkable very few modern cars have.
Roger, you forgot to add the part about the 205 GTi T16 and it’s influence in rallying at the time!
Thanks for a fine homage to a car I’ve mostly just read about, but have had little direct experience with. It’s certainly a car that generates lots of positive press and comments. And I liked its styling very much: it managed to look distinctive without being weird.
My car echoes that thought Paul, Citroen set out to create ordinary looking cars with mine no French wierdness to scare the punters it worked and they built them for many years.
Still a few survivors in the UK that our climate and boy racers parking them half way up a lamp post didn’t see off.The occasional old person car in good condition can be seen or more often a horribly butchered thing with body kit and ear splitting stereo driven by a chav and chavette
The faith of hot hatches: either getting wrapped around a tree or get monstrous body kits later on if it’s not wrapped around a tree.
If I recall correctly the 205 always had a good quality rust proofing from the beginning.
Chavs & Chavettes… has to be a ChEvette joke in there,somewhere. But go easy, fellow CCers. That’s one of my favorite COALs.
When we were in Marrakesh, Morocco for part of our honeymoon 13 years ago this week, these were the official taxi in the city. (They used Mercedes for inter-city trips). Anyway, there were hundreds if not thousands of these, all red, all quite a bit more spacious than one would think and obviously reliable and/or cheap enough to fix when needed. It’s amazing that at the same time, it was unthinkable in the US that anything smaller than a Crown Vic could possibly be used as a taxi. And it wasn’t as if the Moroccans didn’t carry anything with them either when using a taxi.
I’d love a 205GTI, there are several over here now, any that are older than 25years (so 1988 or earlier) can be imported relatively easily.
As a youth, the 205 GTI was one of the cars that I lusted for but couldn’t get in the US. From what I read in Car and Performance Car (both UK mags), it seemed the 205 GTI was one of the only legitimate contenders to the VW GTI.
The other car that I lusted for? The Ford Sierra Cosworth RS. As you might gather, I really prefer high revving, peaky 4 cylinder engines. In my mind, the peak power band shouldn’t start till 6,000 rpm!
Good luck finding a Cossie that’s sensibly priced,the real McCoy,not chipped/tuned to “improve” performance.Still a boy racers’ wet dream of a car here
Get a Sierra with a V6. Although not the same power as the Cosworth, it’s still plenty fast.
Ditto re the Cossie. Our family car in the 80s was a Sierra wagon, I leanred to drive in it and went on to own three Sierras myself; all 2.0 wagons, but a Cossie was what I dreamed of. The Cosworth 3 door (and then 4 door) was Ford NZ’s flagship at around NZ$90K from 1986ish to 1992ish. Still a few around, and many are unmodified originals as they weren’t really hit by the modification scene like in the UK. Hold their value well too – a NZ-new good RS500 is still going to be NZ$50-70K. Here’s a beauty currently for sale: http://www.trademe.co.nz/motors/used-cars/ford/rs/auction-631007038.htm
I would only argue that the 1972 Renault R5 was the first successful elegant/stylish supermini design. Maybe it’s me, but I feel that the R5 is a much more timeless design than the 205.
I dunno. The 205 just strikes me as being another Golf-style hatchback.
I would say that the most significant vehicles of the 80s were the MPVs – the various Chrysler minivans and the Renault Espace. These brought higher seating positions to mainstream buyers, which would then led to the US SUV boom, which in turn spawned the crossover that is now taking the world by storm.
The car market has been transformed by this move to higher vehicles. And I only see that wave continuing (despite my grumblings.)
The Ford Taurus was important for Ford, but I wouldn’t say that it has an enduring legacy for the industry as a whole.
The real -massive- breakthrough of cars in Europe with a higher seating position
was the compact MPV fully based on a hatchback model. The starting point was the 1996 Renault Megane Scenic (see picture). After this car the “full-size” MPVs faded away quickly: too big, too expensive, fuel consumption too high.
Now nearly every small and compact hatchback model here has an MPV~SUV~CUV~Crossover~Whatever version.
My grandparents bought a Scenic new here in NZ in 2000. It replaced their 1991 Ford Fairmont Ghia. I used to drive them places in it, and it was remarkable for its space and comfort. High seats plus huge windows plus loads of storage nooks made it a very nice touring vehicle – except it was the 1.6L auto, so acceleration varied between lacking and non-existent. All the more time to marvel at the scenery out of those lovely big windows! My grandparents are gone now (Grandad died last month aged 95), and my Aunt and Uncle now own the Scenic. It was a breakthrough car for our family by being the first Euro car in over a decade, the first compact MPV, and the most horrifically troublesome… It’s now on its third transmission and second or third steering rack. It’s really not worth throwing the repair money at, but it was such a breakthrough at the time that it remains quite current in its packaging for motoring in 2013.
The car market has been transformed by the introduction of child safety seats that will not fit 3 across a normal Wagon so 3 rows of seats is required,
The taurus simply points out the juncture when Ford was dragged kicking and screaming into the modern era of FWD cars that Camry you picture is actually a Corona in most markets and hails from an earlier era, the Japanese makers of Toyota and Nissan simply fitted FWD powertrains into existing RWD platforms Mitsubishi designed FWD cars from scratch with mixed results Ford stood by with a xerox machine.
I regularly pass a 205 GTI near Napier Port but it wasnt there when I went back with my camera in my car so I could shoot it cool little cars and the fore runner to the brilliant handling Xsara I drive
This is the torsion bar rear end though this is from a 98 Xsara you can see the layout and the clever rear steering bushes that react with inertia This system lets the car forklift out of corners at speeds BMWs cannot reach and it mitigates any mechanical understeer that may occur
Does that have 2 or 3 torsion bars? It seems to me like you’re missing one there (if you got 2).
This is the clever end of a PSA rear axle this part died and allowed the tyre to rub on the inner guard its not repairable they tell me but the head tech at the local PUG dealer wished us luck in re,axleing my car.
Luck didnt play any part, two speedway/hotrod savvy Bogans did it in under 4 hours in my driveway and had to make a trip to find/buy tools, with the right gear and a lift its childs play. Its as easy as a Toyota or Nissan to work on and better thought out than either.
So just how un repairable is it? does anybody know? While I obtained another axle it wasnt easy they dont grow on trees here so I was told, only they are still in production just not with the correct ABS system for my car you have to match the brakes to the OEM setup and there are many.
Try these guys. It’s not in France, but they live and breathe PSA day and night, old and newer models.
And probably they will understand whatever you email.
http://www.renard.nl/
(they also built the Citroën DS rally raid car I posted here somewhere a while ago)
Hey thanx I perused the local Pug dealers parts computer to work out what I could use last time then located the parts in a 2003 306 hatch my car has drum rear brakes and that is the problem nobody I found on the web does drum rear axles but having another proportioning valve has increased braking performance no end the car brakes rear first and the suspension just drags the car down onto the road no nosedive at all maximum stopping and turning traction under brakes that I rarely use.
Well, good luck !
I’m surrounded here by PSA dealers, independent PSA specialists (like the one in the link) and a PSA parts supplier. (from disassembled wrecks etc.)
Roger, you make a great case for the 205, a car that I had very little prior knowledge on. I think Ltd made a good suggestion about soing the most significant car by continent. The 205 was never sold here (to my recollection), and many of its feats you’ve mentioned (popularity of superminis and diesels) are just starting to catch on here, courtesy of other cars.
That being said, it’s hard to name one single car as the most significant of the ’80s. I’d probably go with the Voyager/Caravan because it essentially created a whole new vehicle segment.
I remember seeing these in magazines, and knowing the Peugeots were sold in the US, never understood why these were never sold here? Bumper and crash standards? Exchange rates?
No real Brougham model might have held them back in the US, though my car has all the creature features it didnt come with a vinyl top.
Well the general crapness of Peugeots, mixed with ugly styling and shitty dealer network probably didn’t help either…..
Did the wheels fell off the moment you drove off the lot ?
I’ve just read an American book about Euro cars 🙂
“Did the wheels fell off the moment you drove off the lot ?”
pretty much. actually the 504’s were great but if you bring a french car to the wrong mechanic you are doomed here. same goes for italian and british cars. americans expect to be able to bring their car to the local garage and get it serviced and they don’t like to wait a week for parts. the japanese and the germans made sure to build solid dealer networks and parts distribution here. that’s why they’re still here.
Not sure about you guys but here in Australia it lost a Modern Motor test to a N14 Pulsar back in 1992 when they compared the 205si,AX GT Citroen and a Toyota Corolla Gti all together.Peugeot just didn’t have the dealer network and Australians were not willing to accept a super mini for the price of something in the next class above.The one thing it had going with it along with the Nissan was automatic something you couldn’t get on the others in that test in the sporting versions at the time.
we’ve two of the Mardi Gras special edition up the road from here. And, if, as I understand, the 104 donated its floorpan, that gets an award from me too
In regards to the 205’s replacement, it’s interesting to note that the 205 remained on sale for a while after the 106 and 306 debuted; the 106 was in ’91 and I think the 306 arrived in ’93, while the 205 continued through ’94. Peugeot eventually conceded the point and introduced the 206 in 1998, with the 206 GTi a year or so later.
as to the 205, i think the article illustrates how completely different the european driving experience is from the american. the hatchback wasn’t and isn’t that big a deal here in the states. i’m not putting them down. i actually love the limited experience i’ve had driving small hatches. but gas is (or was) cheap here and we have these endless interstates where we buzz along at 65 – 75 mph with our kids and dogs and all the cheap chinese crap we buy at big box stores…
The U.S. also doesn’t present any overriding financial obstacles to owning a bigger car other than the cost of gas. I think there might be a few states that still use the old RAC taxable horsepower figures to determine license fees, but in general we don’t have road taxes linked to vehicle size, engine displacement or CO2 emissions.
Still, there is a lot to be said for hatchbacks. A smaller car with a hatchback is often more versatile in terms of cargo hauling than a bigger notchback, especially if the hatch is combined with some of the clever packaging techniques used by cars like the Honda Fit.
As a matter a fact, hatchbacks aren’t always small or compact. (say like a VW Golf)
These 2 for example, the former top model Renaults, the 25 and its successor, the Safrane. Basically these are 5 door cars, thus hatchbacks.
The Renault 25:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Renault_25_Olympique_2.jpg
The Renault Safrane:
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Safrane_ph_II_blue.jpg
In Europe it’s common for a Golf to be a family car, but here in the US it is considered a very small car, basically only driven by students, and young single professionals. The Passat or Accord sized sedans are more commonly a family car in the US.
But I don’t disagree hatches are infinitely more useful. I just bought my first sedan in a decade, and while it’s not as versatile as a hatch, I forgot how much more quiet sedans are, and how nice it is to have secure locking storage.
It’s always amusing and very interesting to read about the global differences. Yes, the Golf is a typical family car here. This class of vehicles is often called the “Golf-class”. Every automaker here has a hatchback of this size or (even much) smaller. And they were and are always the most popular and best sold models of the whole automaker’s model range.
Bigger sized sedans are very popular in the “business-” and top-class.
Completely dominated by the Big Three….from Germany that is, counting the VAG-Group as one. It’s a fact that in this class they don’t have ANY competition at all from other automakers, regardless where they come from. (although Jaguar and Volvo try to hang on)
I don’t agree with the title. For European small hatches I’d choose the Fiat Uno, which got rid of the sloped tailgate and used a more upright one for a very welcome increase in rear headroom and useable space. Used by everyone else from then on. And before anyone cries foul, yes, Panda preceded Uno.
I’d also add there the XJ Cherokee, as the first unibody SUV (and spiritual grandmother of all the current CUVs) and the Chrysler Minivans.
Regarding Peugeot, my experience is limited to a 405-based car. The rear suspension is a space saving marvel… and incredibly treacherous/rough if a damper goes south. Of the cars I drove, some had the TU5 engine, some the XU7. The XU7 is rough and noisy, sounds like an old fridge motor and although torquey, could never match the smaller TU5 performance.
On the good side, ride, stability and handling were superb, and the brakes good.
My wee sister’s first car was a late 80s, powder blue 5-door 205 diesel which had already been to the moon and back when she got it (according to the odometer),
Dubbed “Holly Golightly” – presumably for her shabby elegance – she carried on chugging right through sis’s university days and on into early graduate life before developing a fault that was uneconomical to fix (can’t remember the specifics but with her remaining residual by that stage it could almost have been new wiper blades!) From memory one of the mechanics at the garage adopted her and she ran on from there.
Just as Roger says, these are still commonplace in rural France and they always make me smile – fondly remembered design that there are all too few of left here in Scotland.
Nice write up
Really interesting reading (belatedly) the article and the posts above. I think the most significant car of the 80s would vary depending on continent and country. I’m not American, and have never been to your awesome country (I will one day and can’t wait!), but growing up in the Southern Hemisphere through the 80s, the gen1 Taurus seemed to be the most significant from afar. I loved all American cars, regardless of age, but the Taurus was significant because it seemed to be the first “modern” American design. It seemed to young-teenager me to reflect the styling and packaging ethos that was on the modern European cars that were available in NZ.
For me personally, and possibly for New Zealand, the most significant car of the 80s was the Ford Sierra that arrived here in 1983-4. It replaced the Cortina that had been NZ’s top-selling vehicle for many years. The Cortina was NZ’s ubiquitous car – perfect for sales reps (in wagon form), perfect for families, and perfect for grandparents (in 2.0 or 2.3 Ghia form). Perfectly conventional RWD 4 cylinder, and rather good looking into the bargain. It was basically the 1970 German Taunus underneath though.
When Ford retired the Cortina they replaced the sedans with the Telstar (aka lightly restyled Mazda 626), which was modern enough. But then they replaced the Cortina wagon with the Sierra…and what a ground-breaker that was. Stylistically it seemed on another planet to most other 1983-4 cars, including the Telstar and especially the Cortina. The tailgate was notably curvy and blobbily convex, the window included. The grille-less front and one-piece doors/window frames stood out too. Ultimately the Sierra was significant (hamstrung?) because underneath the super-modern exterior was the Cortina’s running gear. It looked like tomorrow, but could be perceived as having yesterday’s engines. This is one reason I believe it’s a suitable “most significant car of the 80s”: it provided a tangible link between yesterday (RWD, Cortina engines) and tomorrow (advanced aerodynamic styling in an everyday family car). I loved the three I owned and still crave a Cosworth or XR4x4 V6.
To bring the debate back to where we started! The 205 looked good as our kid describes – better than anything it competed with and good enough to draw punters from larger cars. Quite an achievement in 1983 – which would you have – this or a 1980 Europeland Ford Escort? No contest.
Not only was it never facelifted – the replacement 105 and 306 were visually respectively 10% smaller and larger clones. Nuff said.
Good case, well argued
I’ve come into this debate very late, but here goes. Don’t get me wrong. I’m a fan of the 205, although I’ve never driven one. I’m also a fan of the 300E. My wife used to one one, and I still own a 124 series (mine’s a 320CE cabriolet). But I would have thought that the most significant car of the 1980s, by a considerable margin, is the original Audi Quattro (aka the Ur-Quattro). The first really successful all wheel drive performance car, it set a new benchmark for such cars, and also completely transformed international rallying. Oh, and it was turbocharged as well …
I’m sorry the 205 wasn’t sold in the U.S.
The Peugeot 205 missed out on two developments, one being the 158 hp 1.9 GTi16 used in the 309 GTi16 and 405 M16 (plus later 148 hp catalyst version), the second (along with the 309) being the larger 89 hp 1.8-1.9 XUD turbodiesels (possibly even including the 108 hp 2.1 XUD).
The most significant car of the ’80s is the Iroc-Z Camaro, because I still like them and I’m in a stubborn mood.
With six years more hindsight since the original post and an American perspective, I’d say the most significant car of the ‘80’s here in the US was the Toyota Camry. Sure, the first gen loses the aero award to the Taurus (and others) but it was popular enough, and set the stage for successive generations which became the mainstream full-size family sedan to millions of Americans. Imagine if someone told you in 1975 that the most popular family sedan in America was a Japanese brand assembled in the US with a 4 cylinder engine and a 102” wheelbase. I think it truly transformed the automotive status quo here, for the industry, the market, and ultimately in driveways and curbside TM. Number 2 would be the Chrysler minivan.
I could agree with you that it was a significant car of the 80s. I’m not sure if 205 was the best, but it could be in the top 3 or 5. Lamentably, this “little lion” wasn’t built in Argentina. We enjoy them thanks to its importation in the early 90s. The magnific 504 was built in Argentina until 1999.
I found a 205 GT recently in a Peugeot specialist junkyard the guy has aroung a hundred cars scattered around a paddock and by phone he directed me to the car containing a boost sensor for my car I passed a complete straight 205 with stripes etc on the way, I read a blog from some Swedes who shoehorned a 2088cc turbo diesel into a 205 it was an absolute rocketship I kinda believe them I had that engine in a 406 wagon and that flew and it weighs half as much again, that car I found would make an interesting project for someone if he’d part with it.
Yes I fully agree with Roger.
The 205 was definitely the first Supermini that drove like a larger car, it was like a dachshund: a large dog with the bravery of a lion packed in a small dog.
Here in Holland the Diesels were king and I had two 205 1.9 Diesel vans (in those days it meant that they had no factory rear bench or parcelshelve. Both of them did over 300000 kilometers each effortlessly.
The Renault 5 was good, the 205 was excellent.
The model was very charming but overall these were bought because you got value for money, the comfortlevel was good and thanks to the 5 speed gearbox noise was ok.
Mine were used as small vans, serving ships all over the continent.
I replaced them back then for a couple of Peugeot Partner vans.
Those shared a lot of parts with the 205 and were virtually indestructable.
Ow, and only a few weeks ago I sold one of the 205’s successors, a white 106 Rallye Phase 1, back to its home country France
Although the106 Rallye is quickly becoming cult, it never touched me in a way the 205 did. This rallye of me did a respectable 233000 kilometers and was still in good nick, I bought it totally stock in bad shape made it 100% in order I had it for 7 years and I kept it totally stock.
A long overdue resurrection. This time around, as an electro Retro:
https://www.msn.com/de-de/lifestyle/shopping/peugeot-205-gti-als-moderne-neuauflage-und-renault-5-konkurrenz/ar-AA1dy85u?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=79b4d53c66bb41519117933a41730af5&ei=243
Let’s hope that higher quality interior materials will be mandated and perhaps parallel-produced internal combustion drivetrains be made available
[img]https://img-s-msn-com.akamaized.net/tenant/amp/entityid/AA1dyc9t.img?w=534&h=300&m=6[/img]
The above image link isn’t taking. Here’s a second try, as an upload: