404 questions

About the stiffness of the 404 sedan, I agree that it could have been better. When these cars get a little rusty, they lose all torsional stiffness and using the factory jack (if the mounts have not detached) will result in unopenable doors when the car is off the ground. The daily driver KF2 sedan that I was forced to scrap in 1990 was like this.

On the other hand, the 404 Coupé is an immensely stiff shell, even when rusty. It's got all of the reinforcements of the cabriolet (huge frame channels inside the rocker panels, welded up fenders,...) plus a strong permanent roof. That's the reason these cars weigh 55 kg more than the sedan.

I suspect that the 504 sedan/Coupé had the same thing going, and perhaps that's one reason that Peugeot started using the 504C for its rally car in 1976 (the V-6 might have had something to do with it too).

I don't know the 403 well enough to comment meaningfully on it, although the egg-shape of its roof seems to be stronger-looking than that of the square-rigged 404.

I still love the 404 though, and if I build a 404 KF2 rally car someday, it'll be a sedan, of course!
 
Indeed, Mike, the rigidity of the 504C is bolstered to massive proportions by the Cabriolet base...

And I really think it was Graham's eyeballs dancing around rather than the windscreen pillars... I've sent many a 404 to the tip, and I've never had any issue with opening doors while jacked up.

But I agree, that's twenty-something years ago now, there would be more and worse rust in any still floating about.
 
graham
it's good to see that i'm not the only one that has always thought that the 403 is a stiffer and tighter car than the 404
hence my reasoning that i have always prefered the 403 over the 404
but each to their own
there always seem to be more 404 lovers over 403 lovers
i'd have a 403 preferably a wagon tomorrow
maybe when i get some nore time up my sleeve i'll hunt around
 
or...

404 Coupé Injection KF2, the best of them all wink

Ray, will you be wathcing F1 qualifying in half an hour?

I will, even though it's only Friday evening... :D
 
Just finished watching it... and I should be at work too...

If you've got a spare coupe for me, I'm happy to prove they're great things Mike.

Another point I thought about, those 2-litre liners into the other block, seeing as you have to find pistons anyway, you might as well bore the liners a bit and get away with using second hand ones. Almost any piston you'd choose would come in an oversize anyway, so you can grab an extra 30 or 40ccs out of it.
 
Well, Jacques is starting sixth, not bad for a BAR. Allez Villeneuve! Vive le Canada! Vive le Canada libre! :D

Sorry Ray, I don't have a spare 404 C at the moment wink

In fact I just bought a brand new (old stock) - expensive! - RR fender (wing) for her in Germany and a few other bits are on their way to me. Nice old car, nothing's too good for her...

Yes, I am nuts tongue
 
Hi all, I am glad to see someone still loves the 404. A fascintating discussion re the merits of 403/404 body shell. No doubt the 403 was stiffer, run into a curb with a 404 almost required a wheel alignment.

Being one who is approaching the geriatric stage, I have been lucky enough to have owned a 203, numerous 403s, 404s and 504s. For sheer joy of driving, nothing compares to the late model 404. Almost enough power, good visibilty and steering that didn't need power assistance. We lived for some years on the west coast of Tasmania (Queenstown), my job required a lot of travelling in and out of the town, 2 and 3 times a week. Did it all in a 403, 404 and 504, the 404 was the pick of the group to cope with the long and winding hills and the eyeball deep snow. 504 was not so good in the snow - for the obvious reason, we had to resort to expensive mud and snow tyres for the 504, ran the same tyres winter and summer on the 403 and 404. For durability the 504 seems to come out in front. The 504 we had in Queenstown broke a ring at 540,000 miles, at that stage it had had a hard life and was almost a "paddy's axe" job.

We still have a fair 404 and a good 504 auto but neither get used much, if ever, but they are still are a delight to drive.

All personal choice of course, but I still think the disc brake 404 is still a great car, it's a shame that here in Tas there has been so little interest that literaly dozens have been trashed over the last couple of years.

Nic
 
Interesting discussion!
The wheel alignment comment reminds me that every rally that I have taken a 404 in has resulted in the front end toeing out!
Never once in a 403 or 504/505.
Nothing to do with strength of the shell of course, more the way in the front end bottoms out onto that hard rubber stop, the 504 system is much better, almost as good as the 403s bump stop halfway along a flexible leaf spring.
I'm surprised nobody has talked about the 404 rear gear box mount being softer than the 203/403 one.
A diesel mount is listed,this could be stiffer. The engine mounts are, and I'd like to try one.
From my experience the early shells (pre 1967) hold up better, these were put together by Continental and General, not Renault.
Just a coincidence, perhaps.

Graham Wallis
 
Yeah, that does seem improbable. I've always been impressed with the 404 front suspension: strong forged suspension arms, cast iron cross-member, proper triangulation with the forward mounts firmly attached by cast iron plates to the monocoque...nice anti-roll bar setup too.

For toe to change something would have to bend or suddenly wear. The bending part seems rather unlikely, especially a bent forged arm inflicted by a rubber cone.

The 403 front suspension is nice too, traceable in layout right back to the 1931 201, the first mass-prodced car with independent front suspension. The thing I'd be worried about with a 403 is the leaves cracking (which in an extreme case, could have disasterous consequences) and the English-style lever arm shocks.
 
Well, those shocks are hardly English style...

More like those used by Chevrolet, the Lovejoy units. Pommie ones were built on a die-cast base and I've known them to break away from crossmembers in extreme crossmembers because of the fragility and compressibility of die-cast alloys.

The Pug ones, on the other hand, had nice long through-bolts, 12mm in diameter (typical British bolts were 3/8" and screwed into captive threads!)... lovely strong Peugeot bolts.

As for the possibility of a leaf breaking, that shouldn't be a catastrophe. The second leaf has a safety loop around the main leaf to cover this eventuality.

And reverting to the main topic... those crossmembers, I was told, are in fact cast steel rather than iron, extremely strong. Having the bump rubber on the end of the lower arm does make it more difficult to instal struts, and replacing the rubber itself is a less than easy job.

Toe in variations in 404s, as in 504s, come from:

* ball joint and silentbloc mount wear.

* tie rod wear.

* possibly wear or abuse to the belleville washers in the ball joint on the end of the rack.

* bent steering arms.
 
The toe out was caused by bent steering arms, due I feel to the sudden stop as the incredibly hard rubber cone (and they are like that from new!)on the lower control arm hits the cross member.The energy has to dissipated somewhere.
Don't think that I dislike 404s, they are just about the most practical and reliable car that you can imagine with styling that looks better and more individualistic with every passing year, its just that I think they are at their best in standard form.

Graham Wallis
 
My daily driver is a 403 with 404 discs, but I have a 1970 404 which I will get registered soon.
I got this car for free after the person who was going to buy it never turned up. It had been sitting for a year, but it started first time. I drove it from the Lakes, in central Tassie, back to where I am an the south east on a temporary permit, and it never missed a beat.
As regards 403v404, the 403 has more character, but the 404 is the ultimate combo of modernish comfort and handling, with classic looks an ease of work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top