Peugeot production in Canada.....and....Australia...maybe NZ too?

Compared to those figures Peugeot in Australia was only a minor player. The 203 started strongly but successive models failed to build up the market. The 404 was a classic example of poor marketing. It could have sold so many but was over priced until 1965 and badly sold.
 
Just returned from 7 weeks spent in the Rockies and south west Canada. Given that French is one of two official Canadian languages, we were struck at the dearth of French cars!
 
You've got to know where to go to find them! But they are definitely not thick on the road. Not having been sold here for nearly thirty years sees to that.
 
Did Peugeot pull out of Canada the same time they did the U.S. (1991)? After a road safety campaign against them, the 405 in particular.
 
Yes, it was August 1991. A few remained unsold through 1992 but 1991 was the official end. The 405 barely registered a blip on the sales charts here, partly because there was a pullout between 1987 and 1989 when Autolion Distribution took over to bring the 405 in, and then promptly went bust and Peugeot had to take over themselves. Their dealer network was always the weak link here, along with poor product selection starting in the early 1970s and crap management. The road safety campaign was not the problem. It was pretending that a 405 was a BMW 325i rival and priced close to the same level, plus the other factors already mentioned.
 
The American 505 owners didn't like the 405 and the road safety campaign probably kept new buyers away although Peugeot denied it. Peugeot Inc needed Walt Worron but he had long gone to Renault to try to save their market (and image). The 405 launch on the American market is written up in marketing textbooks as a classic disaster.
 
I was paying attention pretty closely to things when the 405 was introduced here and there was no high profile safety campaign that I ever noticed (why would there be - only 1 in 100 people even knew a Peugeot is a car, much less what a 405 is), other than Peugeot had to recall all early cars because of the fuel hose at the back rupturing in collisions. We all noticed they had no airbags of course and this was most in-your-face in the USA where nearly all 405 got electric seatbelts as their passive restraint. Plus a redesigned dash compared to the European version, which was officially a knee bolster for unbelted drivers and passengers, or those who were only wearing the shoulder belt (possible, and common in US cars with electric belts).

The transition from rear wheel drive to front was a shock to the traditionalists here and most 505 lovers don't like the 405 and possibly vice-versa (I never wanted a 505 myself, for example). The 505 was the most successful Peugeot model in the USA by far, but not in Canada, where the 504 was easily the best seller.

The 605 was certified for sale here and even appeared in some 1992 model year brochures concerning the range. The 605, had it not been an electronic nightmare in the first years, may have tempted 505 owners (but: no wagon!) and Peugeot wisely decided the 405 was a marketing dud and the 605 would be a warranty nightmare so they bailed out.

For me it was regrettable that they left and I was very upset about it at the time. However, given what they had to sell back then, it was the correct decision. I would have bought a 406 had they been sold here. They should be back in a few years' time.
 
The problem was in America they had the Department of Transport producing lethal head injury figures for the 405 from the 35 mph barrier test even when fitted with the electronic pre tensioner set belts. They maintained the frame wasn't strong enough to support the belts and the B pillars were collapsing. None of which would have mattered to most Americans but the young professionals the 405 marketing campaign was aimed at was the group most likely to take note of such things. Motor Voters might have been a small and unimportant road safety pressure group but they soon brought the usual high profile campaigners like Ralph Nader out of the woodwork. Having to recall all the cars because the pre tensioners weren't working didn't help. The American dealers wanted the air bags fitted but Peugeot said too expensive.
 
I believe that you've got that a bit mixed up.

The 505s from the US in late years (1988-1991) had electric seat belts attached to the door window frames and those are what totally collapsed when subjected to the massive g-loading in a collision. Peugeot's engineers decided to meet the letter of the law (automatic seat belts) and not the intent (preventing injury). The people who designed this for the 505 knew very well the window frames could not resist the load (and that if the door opened in a collision, the occupant would be ejected). Very shabby, criminally irresponsible work on Peugeot's part, but it typified their approach to the US market in later years.

In the case of the 405, the electric belts were attached to the B-pillar and no, those did not collapse under collision deceleration loads. They still were stupid of course. The safety campaign was against the 505, not the 405. By then the model was over a decade old and had run its course anyway.
 
I am quoting a marketing rather than an automotive source but they quote the DOT as saying the B pillars distorted forward on the 35 mph test. Whatever the cause the head injury figure was bad with the belts as mounted in 1989. The Motor Voters campaign started in 1987 and ran straight into the 405 launch. We didn't get much of it here except some motor writers like Chris de Fraga did note the head injury index for the 405.
 
Last edited:
No doubt they did - the 405 was a very lightweight car - but I don't think the car's lack of success in the USA or Canada had much if anything to do with its poor crash test results. The 406 also had terrible crash tests in EuroNCAP.
 
What about the Continental and General cars starting in 1963, Russell?

Russell Hall said:
Then Mike my late night maths is faulty. I don't have a separate figure for 404 for 1970, only total Peugeot sales of 1598 which included 504. Production exceeded sales that year because of a stockpile. Renault is quite firm on their 6112 figure so deduct the 4860 from the previous years from the total to give a likely figure of 1252 the majority of which were utilities. Which sounds about right.
There was no other assembly of 404's in Australia. Kriewoldts imported cars from France via Australia for PNG (including KF2). There was an agent in Malaysia and I have seen a black Malaysian 404 with no heater as standard and an automatic clutch.
Click to expand...
 
Well, time for a recalculation: I have been reviewing Quebec newspapers online and it seems that the last 404 in Canada was built in 1968, in April.

The figures on the first page/first post of this thread were generated by James Mays based on his assumption that Peugeots were built at St-Bruno until 1970.

The total production by year at SoMA IS known with perfect accuracy; his estimate was based on calculating their respective sales in this market and assigning that proportion to the production levels of both Renault and Peugeot at SoMA. So I will do some sums, recalculate and then come back with a better estimate! Also, it's complicated with the fact that some Renaults built there made it to the USA. None of the 404s did. I'll be back....
 
Revised estimate has been posted in Post #1. Long story, if you want to read it, but suffice it to say that about 2765 Peugeot 404s were built in Canada before Peugeot pulled out of the SoMA plan shared with Renault in April 1968.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top