Although Mercedes-Benz was a pioneer and world leader in automotive diesels, starting with their 260D in 1936, Peugeot was also an early advocate of diesel power and sold a good number of diesel-powered cars around the world. So was the Peugeot diesel an unsung hero? How competitive was Peugeot’s oil-burner as the U.S. diesel craze exploded in the wake of the Arab Oil Embargo? Let’s go back to 1974 and have a look at Road Test Magazine’s reviews, covering both the initial drive test as well as a 50,000 mile teardown report for a Peugeot 504D.
(Editor’s note: Road Test is mistaken in saying that Peugeot has been building diesel cars longer than any company, including Mercedes. Peugeot’s 1923 diesel car was strictly a prototype, using a proprietary engine to test the concept, and never went into production. A number of manufacturers did the same thing at the time, to see if a diesel passenger car was viable. They weren’t, because the diesels of the time were too large, heavy, noisy, rough-running and lacking in power. They were just barely suitable for trucks.
Mercedes pioneered the passenger car diesel, its 260D, in 1936, and although it was an improvement, it was used strictly for taxi and commercial use. As were almost all Mercedes diesels in Germany, except for farmers and some other hard-core types until it very slowly won acceptance among regular buyers in the 60s. The energy crisis began to make it more popular, just like in the US. Mercedes built diesels continuously since the 260D.
Peugeot’s first production diesel arrived in the fall of 1958, and used only in commercial chassis the first year. The 1960 Peugeot 403 was the first year it was available in the sedan.
I cannot verify the claim that Peugeot made more diesels through the mid 1970s. I’m a bit dubious, especially since the other claim is clearly wrong. PN)
Much like its gasoline-powered sibling, the 504 Diesel was filled with quirks. Of course, all the eccentric “uniquely French” controls carried over, while the diesel added a few more peculiarities like a throttle control that responded best when applied gradually and matched with engine speed. For American drivers, accustomed to “flooring it” when they were looking to go faster, this was a strange trait indeed.
More odd charts from Road Test Magazine. The middle chart expressing the “Graph of Recorded Data” is utterly useless. The Mercedes 240D is the “worst car to date” and Saab Sonnet III is the “best car to date”? From what time period? Against which competitors and criteria? And what on earth did they mean by “Tire Reserve”? At least I’m clear on the acceleration data: without a doubt, the 504D was bog slow, though in line with other diesel powered cars of the era.
The article headline implies that the 504D was subjected to a grueling 50,000 mile test of its durability in everyday use. In reality, Road Test Magazine staffers only drove the car for less than half of the total 50,000 mile test. The bulk of the mileage (around 30,000) was added under controlled conditions by Uniroyal at their test facility in Laredo, Texas. So not quite “real world”…
So far, it would seem that the Peugeot 504D held up remarkably well as mileage accumulated, with next to no wear. Some of that could undoubtedly be attributed to the controlled conditions of the Uniroyal test, but still, 50,000 miles was a long haul for a car back in the 1970s when life spans and longevity where typically shorter. Impressive, right?
Well, it turns out that the oil was changed every 1,500 miles! No owner on the planet would ever adhere to such a short interval between oil changes–amounting to around a mere 5 or 6 weeks of normal driving between services. Hell, even the much-maligned Oldsmobile 350 diesel V8 would have seemed pristine under the same conditions…
Ah ha, there’s the dirty secret! The Peugeot diesel really did need oil changes at no more than 1,700 miles or so. Otherwise, the oil became “unserviceable,” based on lab analysis conducted by the company in North America. How many of the 504Ds actually got that kind of tender, loving care? Easy answer: when was the last time you saw one?
The 504 series was a well-engineered European car, and the diesel, properly maintained (quite a lot of hassle with 1,500 mile service intervals!), probably could have provided years of excellent service, much like a Mercedes-Benz 240D. The problem was that extra-conscientous, super-thrifty, Euro-centric buyers were few and far between in America in the 1970s. Plus, without the snobbish allure of the 3-pointed star, the Peugeot had to rely on its product attributes and “character” alone. And we all know how that turned out…
It is funny, how the Japanese could take that timing chain set up, and make it live forever while turning 8K… As far as diesels go, I really enjoyed the 2.7L inline 5 that was in our 2004 Sprinter van at work. A sweet powertrain. Sadly, the truck itself was built no better than a recycled soda can, and any rig that has sensors in the brake pads are simply not cool in my book.
Agreed on the 2.7. My 2006 Sprinter 3500 ate rear brakes quickly, leaked A/C refrigerant early and often, and suffered shorts in the rear license plate light assembly. Once was enough.It was my first, and last, German vehicle.
Here in Europe they are known to be notorious rusters . But yes, the 5 was nice.
As usual, Road Test comes off rather amateurishly here, obviously having drunk a healthy dose of diesel-flavored Kool-Aid. Not only did they buy Peugeot’s line about having been the first production manufacturers of passenger car diesels (not), they also subject the car to a test regime that is neither grueling nor representative of real-world driving.
As much as I respect the 504 and the Peugeot diesel, it really wasn’t any better than the MBZ diesels of the time. In fact, having had experience with both, the MBZ diesels always seemed a bit smoother and quieter to me, in relative terms. The Peugeot diesel hammered really loud, even after being warmed up, while the MBZ diesels settled down to a more reasonable sound level.
And their praise for its “performance” is representative too. Where’s the objectivity?
Regarding who produced the first diesel passenger car, it appears that it may have been Citroen in 1935. Evidence as follows:
“The Citroën ‘Rosalie’ car was the world’s first production diesel car, with the engine featuring a design incorporating the Ricardo ‘Comet’ MkIII combustion chamber.”
Source: http://www.oldengine.org/members/diesel/Misc/Ricardo.htm
Who would have guessed?
That wasn’t a “production car” as I define it. Lots of manufacturers at the time were experimenting, and some built small batches for some commercial use, but Mercedes does get the nod for the first regular production diesel passenger car model.
I too have had experience with both Peugeot and MBZ diesels, having owned a ’81 300sd, 85′ 190d and a ’80 505td.
The Peugeot was superior to both of the MBZ’s in terms of acceleration and starting/warming in frigid weather.
A bit off-topic but speaking of Road Test magazine, I spotted this link where one guy scanned various vintage test-drive of the 1971 mid-size Plymouth Satellite/GTX/Road Runner by Motor Trend, Car & Driver, Road Test. including Road Test’s choice for their 1971 Car of the Year (COTY), the mid-size 1971 Plymouth, a big constrast with Motor Trend’s choice, the ill-fated Chevrolet Vega.
http://www.roadrunnernest.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=5078#p32388
Correct me if I’m wrong but wasn’t the 504 diesel a fair bit less expensive than a 200D? (not that either one was exactly cheap…)
Yes it was; $5880 vs. $8715, for the ’74s.
My perception in general is that European cars just aren’t very reliable or suited to the NA market. I base this on what I’ve read here and on other sites, plus my own disastrous experience with my Jetta. I really like these Peugeots, even with the oddball rear styling, but I wouldn’t touch one with a ten foot pole. I wonder how well they held up in real-world driving even with the meticulous maintenance schedule recommended.
Thats the funny part of this test 50k is barely even broken in for one of these however its plain from the clutch wear it was driven by morons not diesel familiar drivers, there is no need to rev the engine and slip the clutch, the clutch in my 300k plus Peugeot diesel engined Citroen shows no sign of any wear and it still has the clutch from the factory according to its parts and service history.
Agreed about the drivers. You’d expect magazine testers to have known diesels have different power delivery characteristics, or checked the torque curve, or at least the revs where the torque peaks – there’s no point going further. I’ve never worn out a clutch in my life!
Nor had my uncle until he bought a 500 Abarth a couple years ago. The clutch went out in a year, which was odd to someone who’d used up many a silly little Cooper S, GTI, GLI, VR6…etc without any clutch issues. The clutch in this Peugeot may have been on its way out because of something other than the way it was driven.
The Uniroyal test drivers, who put on most of the miles, probably are the ones who knew nothing about diesel torque/power curves.
I well remember the claims as in the start of the 1974 Road Test article about Diesels having very clean emissions and the smoke (and smell) was not dangerous, unlike gas engines.
I guess particulates, sulfur dioxide, and NOX emissions were considered safe at this time by the EPA.
Didn’t seem safe or healthy to me when some mechanic was too lazy to hook up the exhaust hose (and not all dealerships had them in the late ’70’s) and rev up the engine for a few minutes and smoke out the entire dealership.
One of the teacher aides at my high school had a 504D driven by her husband. His car’s tailpipe produced so much soot and smoke that its mere presence can be spotted miles away by the column of smoke in the sky…
Dirty diesels were pushed on Europeans by bureaucrats selling the sustainable green lie. People fell for it in spite of what their eyes, sinuses and lungs were telling them about the true nature of diesel exhaust, which isn’t particularly hopeful to think about.
NOx was then starting to be regulated nationally — there was a big panic about meeting the standards originally slated for MY1975. As far as I know, it took an eye-openingly long time for the feds to get serious about sulfur dioxide emissions, considering the problems some European automakers (including BMW) had in the ’90s with high fuel sulfur levels causing engine failure.
I really cringe at the first article’s implication that particulates are harmless (it doesn’t take any great leaps of logic to see why they’d be bad to breathe or consume), but the car magazines of this era said the same things about leaded gasoline.
This test is probably on XD90 engines which is wet sleeve(2.1 L) later motors(i think after 1977) came with XD2(2.3 L)which was dry sleeve and these later dry engines could last 3000 miles on 15 w40 oil without any issues.my uncle in france used to be a taxi driver from 1976 to 1984 and he remembers driving peugeot fiveofours with well over half million KM on stock engines.dry sleeve diesels are tough as nails.
I’m not certain, but I think “tire reserve” represented the difference between the total combined carrying capacity of the four tires, minus either the curb weight of the vehicle or the gross vehicle weight of the vehicle, passengers, and cargo.
If I remember correctly Road Test’s all-time winner in this category was the Saab Sonnet lll, which stands to reason since it was a lightweight two seater with, I think, 165/80-15 tires.
It’s an odd metric to emphasize as they did, but these days a lot of cars would rate close to zero (l’m looking at you, Prius) so maybe we should bring it back.
When you look at tire sizes on typical American passenger cars in the 1960’s, you can see how that tire reserve might have been important. Mercedes also shipped heavy cars to the US riding on skinny 14’s. Tire life was pretty short, about 10,000 miles on our ’65 Impala, for example. The VW Beetle about doubled that with bias plies on both.
…and the lighter ones had to make do with tiny 13″ tires. This 230S has 6.40-13″ rubber.
Don’t know about earlier versions, but the 2.3 turbo diesel in my 505 uses almost no oil with over 200k on it.
Holy Jiffy Lube, Batman! A 1500 mile oil change interval? I’d be changing the oil every two weeks. 0-60 of 19.5 seconds. . . . wow. Yes, the mileage was good but it’s no wonder why these really didn’t catch on. For the price you could have a very nicely loaded Cutlass sedan which was reliable, practical, roomy(ish), luxurious, reasonably quick and powerful, had excellent resale value, and was dumb enough that certain kinds of cats can fix them.
I always feel like the appeal of Mercedes in the 70’s was largely snob appeal, i.e., I can spend way more money than you can, and the unstinting praise from the car buff books, i.e.; I am way more knowledgeable than you are. A less expensive car like the Peugeot wasn’t as snobby appealing. Of course, we also know that Mercedes had typical German thoroughness in setting up a dealer network and service, as compared with Peugeot’s complete non efforts.
I picked up a ’74 504 diesel to get me thru a winter or two in the late ’80’s. It was ultra cheap since it was rusted out. It ran great. It had maybe 125K miles. The accelerator acted as you would expect a target rpm adjustment on a governor. Rather odd but I rather liked it. Very positive. And it acted like a cruise control. Admittedly, cruise was pretty much a brick on the accelerator 🙂
Put the most powerful battery that could fit in there and used synthetic 15w40 and it always worked.
It never left me stranded and did all I asked of it. Gave it to a buddy for the price of the battery two years later and he ran it around his property and sometimes into town when the 320i wouldn’t start in the cold. Finally fell apart from rust. He drove it to the scrap yard. Running great.
I liked the sleeved XD90 engine. The non turbo XD2, not so much. The later non turbos were prone to using oil and having the rings settle if overheated. The turbo diesel is another story. The block is hardened, con rods thicker, bearings heavier, three compression rings with the top being a keystone ring, and 75% greater oil pump capacity due to the oil spraying the pistons. TD’s held up better than any of the normally aspirated ones. I have a tired, rusty 604 that leaks everything imaginable, but it still runs great. How many miles? Who knows. Odo broke at 559k miles years ago. The non turbo diesels would be unlikely to do this.
Just saying you need to judge the vehicle in its time. And there was little that handled and rode like those.
But I’m biased. I’ve driven mostly Peugeot 504’s, 604’s, and Citroen D models over the last 30+ years. And maybe a 505 or two. The ride quality, road handling, comfort, and character of those old French cars is unparalleled. I had only one Peugeot that was a royal PITA so I know it can happen. And this was often the trouble. They were well engineered but “indifferently” assembled. But you were just as likely to get a terrific one as you were to get a lemony one. My experiences with the above have been very rewarding overall.
It is kind of interesting to me that most of you my american friends have had bad experience with Legendary 504s.here in iran the most old cars from 1970s are 504s(all petrol that comes with either four on tree(L)or four on floor(GL)).and Toyota Carinas and coronas and some NOVAs(skylarks&seville).in my own family my dad bought a new 504 on 1977 and kept it for 35 years and ended up putting 800 k km on original engine without any major issues.even the original waterpump and alternator lasted well over half a million kms.amazing quality that you can not find today.
There she is, this is the car I was brought back from hospital in when I was born!
Except Dad’s 1974 504 Diesel was a cheaper ‘L’ version with the 304-style dashboard and column gearshift… but the sound of the Inedor, that loud glogloglogloglogloglo” and the smell… truly a Proustian experience.
I had a Peugeot 504 Diesel Car(Mfg 1977).(When I was in Sri lanka)
But having lot of issue in the engine.only I could run 20,000 miles and need engine overall.the piston rings get worn.