Here's mine:
RCZ Peugeot's last sports car . . .
- Thread starter 207cc Sport
- Start date
Here's mine:
Bugger that .... cars are for driving and enjoying .... not investing. I wouldn't buy any modern car thinking its an investment. They are to difficult to repair down the track ( when all the plastic bits have become brittle).
drive it and enjoy it while you can and dont worry about its retained value. If figure the value I get from any car is its use. We could throw the poogoe 407 to the scrap heap tomorrow, and its paid for itself a thousand times over
If you want to "invest" in something go classic. Somethign like a Citroen DS is infinitely repairable. It was built by mere humans, so can be repaired by them as well
drive it and enjoy it while you can and dont worry about its retained value. If figure the value I get from any car is its use. We could throw the poogoe 407 to the scrap heap tomorrow, and its paid for itself a thousand times over
If you want to "invest" in something go classic. Somethign like a Citroen DS is infinitely repairable. It was built by mere humans, so can be repaired by them as well
Yup, I agree. I drive my RCZ once every fortnight for about 60 kilkometers. Every other week, I drive my One Owner (me) Nissan 1992 N14 SSS for the same klicks. Reason? I live on a mountain and only go down once a week for supplies. I'm a retired ratbag.Bugger that .... cars are for driving and enjoying .... not investing. I wouldn't buy any modern car thinking its an investment. They are to difficult to repair down the track ( when all the plastic bits have become brittle).
drive it and enjoy it while you can and dont worry about its retained value. If figure the value I get from any car is its use. We could throw the poogoe 407 to the scrap heap tomorrow, and its paid for itself a thousand times over
If you want to "invest" in something go classic. Somethign like a Citroen DS is infinitely repairable. It was built by mere humans, so can be repaired by them as well
The Red Jett:
Classic cars are only valuable to people who dreamed about them when they were younger.
My son who is 40 would not even know what a DS was.
His classic car get would be an early WRX. This is the car he would lash out on
His daughter would probably want an early model Tesla with the great acceleration.
My son who is 40 would not even know what a DS was.
His classic car get would be an early WRX. This is the car he would lash out on
His daughter would probably want an early model Tesla with the great acceleration.
interesting ... I'm in my 40's .... and think a wrx would bore me to tears. Once you have done a few 4wheel donuts with it .... you have a hugely laggy car made of plastic that looks as exciting as a bath tubClassic cars are only valuable to people who dreamed about them when they were younger.
My son who is 40 would not even know what a DS was.
His classic car get would be an early WRX. This is the car he would lash out on
His daughter would probably want an early model Tesla with the great acceleration.
I'm just weird though, nothing much built after the 1970's interests me much.
In that case you are not weird but quirky like myself
I thought it was the Citroens that were "quirky"!!In that case you are not weird but quirky like myself
“… a Citroen DS is infinitely repairable …”
could be an interesting thread ( did you exclude IDs )?
could be an interesting thread ( did you exclude IDs )?
Have a look in the restoration and Citroen forum. Citroen DS's (regardless of trim level) are just fascinating.
I mean real Citroen DS/ID's ..... Not the modern plastic things. They are the polar opposite to what signifies "Citroen DS". I'm sure they are a nice car in there own right, but they are no deesse.
Its a different time now. Nothing like it will ever be built again. Even the RCZ .... I'm quite suprised it was built. Much like the Citroen C6 and Peugeot 605 (er, what is the peugeot equivalent?) .... they will likely never be made again. There is no money in them as they are such limited sellers. I know the RCZ is based on the 308 ..... but still, the scope of economics say it shouldn't exist. I guess they wanted a "hero" model that helps sell other cars ( that worked, I didn't even know what an RCZ was until my wife came home last year and said "I want an rcz").
seeya
Shane L.
Shane, i was thinking of what you are doing with those earliest examples; so daunting I can’t help seeing reasons to give up any hope of maintaining originality …’ infinitely repairable ‘ sounded like Famous Last Words - but i love to be wrong.
Oh, they are easily rebuildable. I don't want to sidetrack this thread though. If you choose the right classic car, pretty much every part is being made for them somewhere. So they can endlessly be rebuilt. brake fluid citroens for example can always be converted to mineral oil.
Its not like modern cars, could you imagine trying to move a motor from a 407 and install it into the rcz.... same most, probably never work
I've actually considered doing exactly that. My 406 coupe is so much faster and aggressive to drive than the RCZ, so I think a 407 V6 motor is exactly what the RCZ needs. Not much difference in weight up front, and the chassis would handle it fine. Engine bay is plenty big enough......imagine trying to move a motor from a 407 and install it into the rcz.... same most, probably never work
Doesn't the rcz han an R version? Basically the same as the 308 GTI 270. The 270bhp coming out of the 1.6 is plenty raucous.
The engine really goes bananas from 4000 onwards and even on a dry road it will struggle to not spin the front wheels up to about 70 in second gear. And the brakes bite very hard.
It's laugh out loud fun when you actually get to open the throttle and throw it down a good bit of road.
The engine really goes bananas from 4000 onwards and even on a dry road it will struggle to not spin the front wheels up to about 70 in second gear. And the brakes bite very hard.
It's laugh out loud fun when you actually get to open the throttle and throw it down a good bit of road.
?? Really, the RCZ has waaaaayyyy more power. 266hp and 0-100 in under 6 seconds. Its no slouch. even the deisel here is effortlessly quick. not by any means aggressive though
especially compared to the last of the petrol ones.
yeah.
| Cylinders: | L4 |
| Displacement: | 1598 cm3 |
| Power: | 199 KW @ 6000 RPM 271 HP @ 6000 RPM 267 BHP @ 6000 RPM |
| Torque: | 243 lb-ft @ 1900-5500 RPM 329 Nm @ 1900-5500 RPM |
| Fuel System: | Direct Injection |
| Fuel: | Gasoline |
| Fuel capacity: | 14.5 gallons (54.9 L) |
| PERFORMANCE SPECS | |
|---|---|
| Top Speed: | 155 mph (249 km/h) |
| Acceleration 0-62 Mph (0-100 kph): | 5.9 s |
I don't look at the power or accelleration figures. Its the torque from 1900rpm through to almost the redline that is quite incredible for its capacity.
And no safety improvements . . .
Very clever mapping and the 33psi peak boost doesn't hurt.
OK, I didn't mean to stir a hornet's nest.
I'm not comparing the V6 option to the RCZ-R. I was comparing it to the RCZ in my shed. It will be a while before a decent RCZ-R is within my price range, possibly never.
So when you line up the V6 to the THP 200 it becomes quite comparable. But it sounds better, has way crisper throttle response, and is very easy to make it go even better. Plus, I just like making these abominations!
I'm not comparing the V6 option to the RCZ-R. I was comparing it to the RCZ in my shed. It will be a while before a decent RCZ-R is within my price range, possibly never.
So when you line up the V6 to the THP 200 it becomes quite comparable. But it sounds better, has way crisper throttle response, and is very easy to make it go even better. Plus, I just like making these abominations!