505 GTI versus STI discussion

I know nothing of these things, but can you swap the 3 speed auto out for a more modern 4 or 5 speed auto? I'd imagine it's far too hard but interested nonetheless.

Late 505s had a 4 speed. Need a shorter torque tube/tailshaft and a 4.6 diff ratio.
 
Why bother.......let Luthier be content with a great car once Dan knocks the rough edges off it.

By the way, "Armidillo" I went to a lot of trouble and expense to keep Cecil well maintained. Ask Dan to have a look at the receipts file!!

The trouble in the sticks is ,you can't find anybody who knows anything beyond doing an oil change in a bloody Commode Drawer (or Fowl Can.!)Even "Alpine Affaire" failed me(who do you think put the new plugs in it?)after an $880 service charge!

Carry on Dan but don't be too quick to throw everything away without thoroughly checking first.

Final thought........ To those who know the road..... "Cecil" would go through and up the Loch Hills on the South Gippsland highway and still be accelerating at the top in third.(And in his current "crappy state.") :headbang:
 
Yep: 36 all round is what I kept in them also. I also second the statement on Peugeot knowing what they're doing. (well, once anyway.)

Actually, there's no best pressure for tyres as what's "best" is relative to what one wants to achieve. Basically, you two favour Peugeot's recommendation as best achieving what you want. Someone with other dynamic goals would find Peugeot's recommendation sub-optimal.

For most normal family cars, manufacturers recommend pressures that favour an understeer handling balance & ride comfort although the latter in changing somewhat as fuel economy is pursued.

cheers! Peter
 
Yes it was well maintained but of course if you don't do it yourself you can only maintain as well as the mechanics you pay/trust and in that way Deane was let down . I am not concerned at all. I usually change the timing belt with every newly acquired vehicle and it's a very familiar job these days. Other small things I've found are also important.
Being Auto I will have to make the flywheel lock tool when I get to bolting it back up.

This car has had so much love it is one of the best 505's you would find anywhere now. It has only 180,000K's on the clock, the finish and interior are almost perfect. It has aircon that works well, aftermarket cruise control, and button operated remote central locking. It has been serviced regularly and kept in pristine state. I am soooo greatful to Deane for allowing me to be the current custodian.
I enjoy driving with the auto which is extremely relaxing and though I don't believe specs I saw that quoted mileage at 8litres per 100K's, no I don't think so, if I can get it to 10Litres per 100K's I'll be extremely happy.
Then with that slugishness I have already improved it a lot and hope that the final tuneup once everything is sorted may yield a good result. If not I'll put up with such a beautiful car. I'll also be getting some matching paint for a couple of small blemishes on the body as I want this car to be properly immaculate.
 
Why bother.......let Luthier be content with a great car once Dan knocks the rough edges off it.

By the way, "Armidillo" I went to a lot of trouble and expense to keep Cecil well maintained. Ask Dan to have a look at the receipts file!!

The trouble in the sticks is ,you can't find anybody who knows anything beyond doing an oil change in a bloody Commode Drawer (or Fowl Can.!)Even "Alpine Affaire" failed me(who do you think put the new plugs in it?)after an $880 service charge!
...
:headbang:

Didn't mean to cast any nasturtiums at your efforts DeeCee - the description was only meant to apply to cars Shane has described.

Totally agree with your comments about finding a mechanic with a brain - although there's a couple of guys in Armidale who I can trust (at a price - they're not cheap)!

Cheers
Alec
 
Yes, absolutely. I play around with the pressures a lot. I was running 40 front, 38 rear but have found 36 all round is a really nice balance for ride and handling - amazingly that's what the cars tyre placard says. Peugeot do know what's best I guess.
Where do they state 36 psi please ??
 
I haven't seen 36 mentioned anywhere actually. The manual says something like 23 in the front and 26 at the rearwhich of course is ridiculous. I have run 36 in most cars most of my life and that's the way it stays unless I go up to 40 in the rear with a trailer on.

Interested in your research Speaksgeek. Please keep us informed if you work out how to do that.
 
Where do they state 36 psi please ??

On my driver's door, there's a placard clearly stating 36 psi all round. I've taken a pic but can't upload from mobile. This is for a 306... Just in case I wasn't clear previously.

now logged in, will post pic. tyre_inflation_306.jpg
 
Last edited:
Yep mine are both the same, my 84 STI and my 86 GTI clearly showing 26 and 30 on 15" rims but recommending an increase of 4 for prolonged high speed cruising, so nowhere does it say 36. Doesn't matter , just a small point.
 
Again, view the manufacturer's suggestion as just that.

First, tyres vary in structure & tread edge stability so that a front/rear balance & absolute pressure settings which suit one tyre tyre will be inapt for another.

Second, owners can differ in the dynamic profile they want from what the manufacturer is assuming is generically a good idea.

In short, with any tyre fitment, experiment - roundabouts are a good place to play.
 
roundabouts are a good place to play.

They certainly are...especially in wet weather. And the awful behaviour of my VW beetle in the wet on a roundabout is what first prompted me to buy a Peugeot 504 !

In the dry it had been fine....
 
Swing axles, positive static camber, a light front end & a rear engine constitute a dubious starting state for wet weather handling. And it's not just the rear that can be troublesome, the light front end can easily go with insensitive inputs on sharp corners. The situation is exacerbated if rubbish tyres are fitted & exacerbated further if (very camber sensitive) cross ply tyres are fitted.

I teamed to drive (& learned to hoon & thus learned car control) on a bog-standard Renault Dauphine on Dunlop B7+ cross plies. Whatever might be said about it on wet bitumen, it was very capable on dirt roads (despite steering that was stupidly slow-geared for such a light front end).

And yet; and yet . . . .

Despite such an unpromising basis, the format is easily modified to become very capable. I have a wildly modified Renault 4CV & a mildly modified R8.

The swing axle evils can be tamed (static -ve camber, restrictions on axle droop, a camber compensator transverse leaf spring & so on).

Different tyre sizes front/rear & careful attention to tyre pressure differentials front/rear address inherent imbalance; & the use of a very good wet tyre at the front addresses wet grip issues of such a light front under braking & tight cornering.

And quicker ratio steering allows better driver control when being playful.

It also helps to be attuned to the car. Many VW owners came to them from front engine, rear wheel drive (leaf sprung live rear axle) British stodge & one could hardly drive the VW in the same way & expect the same behaviour.

The same improvement story could be told for modified VWs &, of course, the later Superbeetle was inherently superior owing to suspension changes.

cheers! Peter
 
Don't know much but I remember how well my first GTI executive handled and I also remember from not that long ago how well my series 2 GTI with 5 speed gears could go, using 205/60/15 Michelin tyres. Sorry folks but so far I have not ever experienced handling like those cars. I would generally run 36psi all round and those cars went round corners with incredible ease up to 120K's and after that they hung in like race slicks.
Now in my dotage I would rarely challenge the laws of physics but every now and then it's good to scratch that itch if you know wot I mean.
So despite all kinds of recommendations the next set of tyres I put on a 505 will be the above specs which are also strangely listed in the holy book because that's what they were designed to have, well so close with the unobtanium metric ones.
But I also have an update on the STI having just done a trip to Brisvegas and back today. Coming after a job I did yesterday where I lowered the fuel tank and refitted the overflow pipe so it went right through to the engine bay and fuel fumes feed into the charcoal cannister and thence to the inlet manifold.
So having all that system fully connected and intact I found the car goes better, has more power and as I discovered has better fuel economy.
It returned 8.96Kilometres per litre today, thrashing along the freeways at 110K's [a bit over 4000rpm] and running the aircon almost the whole trip.
With this crazy 3 speed auto I reckon that's impressive. I get 10K's per litre with the GTI 5 speed manual using top gear as an overdrive with revs at about 2500rpm at 110kph. So I reckon I can do better with both cars with a bit more tuning.
I suddenly remembered all those 70's Volvos that also ran this K-jetronic setup. Yep and they were very bloody thirsty heavy bricks of things. But at the same time I still believe that a well tuned STI should sort out 10K's per litre and go like stink.
Working on that theory. Cheers.
 
Hmm! It's sometimes a false move to chase a size unless a suitable tyre is available in it. If, despite that, you are settled on 205/60, then there is no short list. The best of the medium list is Continental UltraContact 6. Not a patch on a PremiumContact 5 but the best of a not so wonderful bunch of possibilities in that size.

Bonne Chance! Peter
 
Under 10L/100kays is fine I reckon. I remember my old manual STi never got close to that.... Didn't go like stink either. Handled beautifully though. Had a real lightfooted but stable feel, and so progressive. I remember getting a little excited with the throttle around a corner and the thing just casually slid the rear the perfect amount. Delicious moment!

To put fuel use in perspective, my (ahem) Audi A4 Quattro wagon is lucky to get 11L/100 on the freeway. About 14 around town. Expensive... But it does go pretty well. In a straight line.
 
Hmm! It's sometimes a false move to chase a size unless a suitable tyre is available in it. If, despite that, you are settled on 205/60, then there is no short list. The best of the medium list is Continental UltraContact 6. Not a patch on a PremiumContact 5 but the best of a not so wonderful bunch of possibilities in that size.

Bonne Chance! Peter
I went shopping today for the PC5.
I asked the sales person about 205/55/16 (for the 308) and he proudly offered the UC6. Went home & currently checking the reviews and it seems to be way superior to the PC5.

attachment.php
 
I went shopping today for the PC5.
I asked the sales person about 205/55/16 (for the 308) and he proudly offered the UC6. Went home & currently checking the reviews and it seems to be way superior to the PC5.

attachment.php

User reviews are of dubious merit as one has little idea of the criteria of appraisal which have been deployed. Tyre tests are better. The PC5 has been dominant in the latter since its release &, although replaced in most large diameter sizes by the PC6, remains a leader. The only test of the UC6 (a regional, not European, line tyre & thus not featured in the European tests) I've seen is a Choice one & the UC6 was mediocre in the wet.

I would definitely choose PC5 over UC6 on any performance parameter one cares to specify except wear.

Then again, 205/55-16 is a lovely size for choice of good tyres. Were I to be buying, I'd choose from the following (rank-ordered) shortlist.

1 Michelin PilotSport 4

2 Bridgestone Turanza T005

3 Conti PremiumContact 5 or Goodyear EfficientGrip Performance

4 Bridgestone Potenza Adrenalin RE003

5. Dunlop FM800

The P54 is the class act of the list being good at everything. A welcome return to form by Michelin.

The T005, PC5 & EGP are variations on a "good all rounder" theme with the T005 being newest & doing very well in tests. So is the FM800 in this "all rounder" group. Another regional tyre like the UC6, it is very good in the wet although this drops off in "merely slick" conditions with tread wear in a way that I don't follow. Such conditions are not so much tread-dependent as compound-dependent & my current hypothesis is that the compound goes "off" overly swiftly with age (compared, say, with Conti compounds, which seem unusually stable over time).

The RE003 is a special case. Crisply responsive & talkative at the limit in the dry & capable & unsnappy in the wet (although a tad less good in the wet than the above listed), a major motivation for buying it (which I have done repeatedly in 215/60-16 on a couple of Foresters) is that Bridgestone regularly do "4 for the price of 3" deals on it.

Any of the above would delight & the UC6 is certainly not rubbish, just a step down.

In all of the above, my appraisals prioritise wet grip (lateral & under braking) & limit behaviour while also prioritising (to a lesser extent) dry grip & crispness of response. I have given no weight to fuel economy, noise, comfort or longevity.

cheers! Peter
 
Top