Possibly looking at buying one of these, anybody got one that can comment on reliability etc. Looking at cars around 04 reg and 40,000 miles on the clock
Cars are- Clio either 172 or 182 depending on what comes up, or the peugeot 206 gti hdi (the newer 1.6l 100ish bhp engine, not the 2.0 hdi, already got one of those).
Thanks

And on the 182's is there a change between the 04 and 05 reg plates, as there seems to be a significant jump in price there?

[Edited on 15/1/10 by andrew-theasby]

i was also considering the renault 172/182 but have heard so many horror stories about them. the 172 clios seem like a lot of car for the money though as they are going rediculously cheap now! they look fun and fast but after owning a pug 306 s16 i swore never to buy a french car again,it had done low miles (30 k) ,fully serviced,loads of previous mot's and receipts and it was a total disaster! seemed like a day didn't go by where something never went wrong,

had a new 206gti, fun car but the build quality was rubbish..

PuG 106 Has moon miles on it and still it carry s on...Dont understand the french bit.....
think its if you get a Monday or Friday car

182 on ebay now with just 1 day left. 2004 54 plate, 44k no bids at £4k

Ive found my Clio 172 100% reliable,its done around 15 trackdays in the 18 months I have own it ,handles great,and goes well enough.

Bit of a difference between a Clio 172/182 and a 206 1.6 HDI...?

I've had a number of Pugs; 2x 205 GTIs, 106 D and a 306 HDI - all were/are perfectly reliable, cheap to own and good to drive so i question the whole distaste for Frnch cars myself.

That said after having a new Seat Leon and VW Passat for a while there is a world of difference in the general quality, but then you pay for it too.

Ive never had anything but french cars, clio first then 106 gti, 205 gti, then 306 hdi which ive had for 4 almost faultless years and 70,ooo miles, so im not worried about it being french, just whether any particular model has common faults.
I know what your saying about "Bit of a difference between a Clio 172/182 and a 206 1.6 HDI...? " Its a long story, but i got the diesil when my daughter was born as a sensible car and at the time really wanted a 172. since then i would have had a clio v6 but chickened out on the day with it only being a 2 seater, even tho i still toy with the idea of swapping the tiger for one, so ive always loved clios, and at the mo all the other diesils i like are too expensive apart from the 206, so basically its chance to have a not too uneconomical fun car for a little while until the civic 2.2's, beemer 1 series etc come down to my price. whereas the 206 is the economical car thats got a bit of go with it. Hope that makes sense, im terrible at choosing cars!

I had a Clio 182 with cup pack for just less than two years while I couldn't decide what to get after an S2000. It was all round the best car I've ever owned. No faults, problems or unexpected costs. I did 8 track days ( a few were wet) and it only cost me a set of 888s and a set of brake pads...

My brother has had his for years and he's had the same experience.

Parts aren't cheap from Renault but the car is relatively easy to work on.

Oh and if you take it easy it'll do 45mpg...

My brother had a Clio 172, a bit harsh sprung for our contry roads but otherwise great to drive & as said very good on fuel.
On the downside it was away to the dealer for a fair few annoying faults, rear shockers mainly & some electrical stuff. He decided to sell it before the warrenty ran out!
The old 306 TD he replaced it with as a stop-gap runabout has ended up staying as it's been little trouble.