Peugeot 306 Hatchback 1993

Want to know everything there is to know about this car?

  • Economy

    Value

    4 out of 5 4.0

    Reasonably priced, and good standard kit.

    Costs

    4 out of 5 4.0

    Expensive servicing, otherwise a cheap car to own. Depreciation not as heavy as an equivalent Ford or Vauxhall.

  • On the road

    Driving

    5 out of 5 5.0

    Fantastic handling, lots of steering feel, decent brakes and a lovely ride. I think this is a more entertaining drive than the Focus I have now.

    Performance

    3 out of 5 3.0

    Lively enough, but considering there was a 16 valve 1.8 under the bonnet, it felt a bit breathless at times. Engine hates revving.

  • Living with it

    Reliability

    1 out of 5 1.0

    Oh dear! A catalogue of faults.

    Image

    4 out of 5 4.0

    Dynamically and aesthetically superior to its successor the 307, so has avoided the "old car" image that most of its contemporaries now have.

    Comfort

    5 out of 5 5.0

    Magic carpet ride, supportive seats and decent driving position. Again, better than the Focus in my opinion.

  • Security and Service

    Security

    3 out of 5 3.0

    Deadlocks and an immobiliser, but won't stop a determined thief. Got broken into twice.

    Service

    1 out of 5 1.0

    Hopeless! Faults not fixed, new faults invented, spurious items on the invoice which the dealer could not explain.

  • Problems and Ownership

    Problems

    Engine

    Poor cold starting, tappet noise, stalling when cold, revving to 5,000 RPM by itself when hot, 2 oil leaks, coolant leak, used a litre of oil every 800 miles by the time it got to 90,000 miles.

    Other

    Instrument panel failure, stereo failure, window regulator broke up, airbag wiring worked loose, stereo remote stalk packed up, passenger footwell carpet came adrift, various trim breakages/detachments/rattles.

    Ownership

    Did you buy the car new?

    New

    Would you buy the same model again?

    No

    Did you buy from the same manufacturer again?

    No