Used to work in the insurance biz, before getting into IT (thank God). The manufacturers always understate the horsepower for insurance and marketing reasons. Insurance companies like limited HP and owners love getting something they did not expect...
Don't totally agree with that. Some might (fully believe Peugeot did, as they underquoted performance figures too) but some cars don't hit the numbers they're supposed to. Alfa Romeos and TVRs are two of the worst I've run on here for not hitting the numbers, and some Fords are pretty bad for it.
Worked for a tuning company a while back and my findings were: Mustangs never hit their figures (400hp after a tune when the customer expects 440hp stock was always interesting). N/A Mercedes engines used to be very similar, even some of the older AMGs would make less power (but always more torque) than claimed. Italian cars have been the worst for it my experience, naturally aspirated Ferraris and Maseratis would never even come close to their figures (with the exception of the 458, which is a technical marvel and very often showed bang on figures). Audi 4.2 V8s were also a culprit of not making claimed power even after a remap. Conversely, BMWs and Porsches seem to be in the Peugeot camp of "Here's 10% more car than you thought you bought". The later Porsche GT3 cars are stupid and genuinely make 500hp+ stock from an N/A 4.0L every single time. C2 VTS, 206 GTi and pretty much every PSA car from that era would at least make it's figures, every one after that (with the Prince turbo 🤢) would really struggle and the torque curves were _disgusting_, peaky and sharp the whole way along. I've never dynod a 106 so these are always fun to watch
Something about the old TU and XUD being such good units. We all just thought the cars were light so they were quick but this proves they were over performing.
Love these Dyno runs. Very impressed with these French engines. Back in 1996 i purchased a Golf 8V GTI, but just before, I drove a 1.6 205 GTI. The 205 just felt so much faster.
And this is the dyno that you thought had no further use... Glad to see it in regular usage, the videos are strangely compelling! Very clean exhaust this time, that's good to see.
From a business POV it has no real use here, but from a RUclips POV it's strangely brilliant! Vids are quicker and easier to edit, too. I could handle a lot more than I'm currently doing.
I am thankful for Hubnut for bringing me to UPnDown RUclips Channel. Peugeot, Renault and Citroen have all departed Canada in the 1980's, I really appreciate the fact that Kitch is keeping Peugeots and Citroens alive.
@@maxeluy I had a ‘Dumpit’ in Kingfisher blue as my first car. I regretted selling it in 2010 and still regret it now. Some gimp wrote it off a year later. I’d love to have another one!
One particular thing I remember from my 2001 Saxo 1.1 Asics, other than it going like mad, is that the starter motor was..........very eager as to always say: "Yay! Where are we going?, where are we going? C'mon mate, time to rev my tits off. like some jumpy spaniël. And the fact shifting gears was like stirring petrol(I believe a common issue)
Allo! Your eldest has great taste in cars! My BMW E46 is my forever car but now with my own Dumpit (still on axle stands with a weird wheel bearing issue) in addition for local work, I can't see me ever needing another car. 106s are magical little things 😍
I agree with the comment that some manufacturers understate their figures. A friend who was in the tuning industry for rallying said a lot of the Homologation cars under performed but it was very simple to make them over perform. Likewise many press cars were tweaked , Lotus for instance had better cams and the rev limiter"adjusted " , this did result in a few tired press cars after a while , but they were certainly impressive , a friend had an old Elan that went like the clappers but smoked, when it was finally overhauled did we find a big valve head and L1 ? cams. we were told it was an old development car that had been loaned out to the press.. Motor bikes were much the same , with a friend going to the bike show and saying to a man on the manufacturers stand that his bike did not go as expected , the man wrote down a part number and told him to order it off a dealer and it would eliminate " the flat spot "!! the resultant warp drive scared the hell out of me. So I'm pretty sure cars are tuned for which ever entity is going to set a standard......
They dont lose any at all, in fact they gain. Its also been the case since the 1980s at least that cars dont "wear out" with normal driving in the way most people consider the meaning, in ways that could make them lose power. So if you have heard otherwise later than 1980s, you have been taken for a ride. Probably just outdated knowledge that lives on, like with many other things. Some car magazines have done 125k mile dynotesting on lots of different cars since back then and all have shown same or better power than new.
@@GoldenCroc pxaxa, a good one, such a brilliant wishful thinking - increasing mileage, not loosing power, only gaining, wear (in essence physics+chemistry) is inexistent - u r genius, boi
@@bonifacijus11 Not for any mileage just about any car is likely to see, certainly in the UK, it doesnt drop because of "wearing out", no. This has been, as said above, proven time and time again in empirical testing for decades. As for the "physics+chemistry" part of your post, I can only assume your understanding of the factors at play in this regard is much too simple, leading you wrong. I would suggest looking into it more, there are many studies about it and also a good chunk of plain old practical testing. On this very channel (and this video!) to start. Cheers mate.
Wish you had a 1.5 diesel 106 I had 1 as my first car would be interesting to see if that makes more than it should have. I know when i put a k&n air filter on it. It seemed to fly.
These Dyno runs are such fun to watch, makes me very curious how my the 206cc 1.6 16V i bought my parents would perform since it has a good punch to it up to about 6Ks..but then again theres a "Dyno" Right outside the house, but i would love a 106, dad had a blue low spec model (likely dumpit spec) when was young to move on from a Zafira/dodgy corsa b, i was a very happy passenger across speedbumps and tight roads! Though if one had money a 306 GTi6 would be nice..
I had the Saxo 1.6 Sport (VTR in some countries) with that 8V TU engine. It was really fun and really torque - it was just pulling and pulling. There were a shitload of tuning kits especially for the 8V.
When I was young and stupid I didn’t like the S2 Rallye because I had an S1 Rallye and I thought the S2 was a bit lame in comparison. Now I think the S2 is utterly, utterly fabulous and feel ashamed that I was a silly immature moron. 🤷♂️
I had a 1996 106 GTi back before I had the skills and confidence to push a car in anyway, but I do remember it being a hellova machine. There is currently a phase 2 Rallye like this one parked next to my cars which belongs to a neighbor, but I don't know where he lives and I don't feel like dropping a note on it to ask if it has a price on it. Oh how I miss that 106 GTi.
That would be interesting. I've never dyno'd anything with the RS engine in. My old C4 VTS 180 actually made 173bhp (once I'd finished playing with it - started off at 165!) Closest I've done is the 1.9 16v in the BX - lots of them. Always between 152-160bhp (book figure is 160). Nothing's over performed like the 106 has, but then they're not TU engines...
@@UPnDOWN Have you ever dyno'd anything with the TUD3 / TUD5 diesel engines? Not exactly a ball of fire, but would be interesting to see if the book figures were lower than they should be for them.
I have a 306 rallye but never had it on a dyno. It feels good to me for the 167bhp but you never know! Most I've seen back in the day did make standard or slightly over power. Sounds like you were unlucky!
@@timgass5426 I think mine was cursed! HG blew the day I bought it and again about a year later. Peugeot main dealer who did it the first time set the timing wrong, gave it back to me sounding like a sewing machine with what felt like about 60hp.. Had a Lynx Rotrex supercharger conversion fitted, 260-270 hp, was v.fast but it blew up after 6 months as the garage who fitted it (who had a good reputation on the forums) cut corners/bodged stuff. I won't name Carl Grimsley from C.G cars in Leicester LE3 2FN as that wouldn't be fair. Glad to hear you've got a good one, they're lovely cars with a timeless design.
I overlaid them to show the owner on the day. The 16v just has more of everything, though the curve is steeper once the revs build. The 8v is more linear.
Have you seen the new SM that Citroen (or DS) have built? I’m guessing it’s like the Peugeot 504 Coupe, Opel Manta and Renault 17 looky-likeys that have been shown in recent years: leccy one-offs that will never be sold.
If you want Dumpit in a fat suit to give it a go, I'd be happy to trot my 306 XSI down for a crack! Would love to know how accurate the 135hp figure is
Iv got a totally standard Peugeot 405 SRi that iv had from new that I'd love to see on your rolling road as iv always harboured a thought that it was more powerful than its original figures suggest???
My Mitsubishi Lancer is supposed to have 98BHP, be lucky if it’s got 80😂. Still drives nice for an auto (now disabled 😢), can’t complain too much as I’ve kept it for 4yrs now😊
In theory there's no difference at all. The highest placed Saxo/106 on the leaderboard is a VTS-powered Saxo VTR with 128bhp. I've had another VTS on there before but for the life of me I can't find the graph.
@@UPnDOWN thats sad to hear. Although the State off healh might make a small impact & the vts & gti's having a slightly different gear ratios from what ik. A modified example would also have been intresting (not big mods like cams etc, just exhaust & intake to free it up a bit to see what difference it would make) although someone might already have done so without me knowing. Would be potensial for sone decent context. Next up in line i guess would be a 1L mk1 106 or a 1.4L 106 either mk2 or mk1 xsi
Fun! If you ever get the chance, do a run with an 1980's Audi 5cyl , they systematically UNDERperform. (2.3L: 134hp claimed and it hardly ever gets more then 125hp)
@@UPnDOWN I have a Passat GL5 with the JS 2.0 5 pot, with K-jet you could try, it's closer to Linwood than your rollers though... Of all the 5 cylinder cars I've driven, the JS was my favourite. Would love to know how it looks on the dyno. The 7a engine is another I'd like to see. They were a bit of an oddball, with 20v head, naturally aspirated, it was really closest to a 5 cylinder version of the Mk.2 Golf GTI 16v KV engine. Early ones had a fantastic fabricated 5 to one equal length manifold which was substituted for a boring cast job on later cars, yet the book power figures stayed the same...
@@mmllmmll22 You're quite right, I did mean KR. The KV was the 2.2l NA 5 cylinder concurrent to the JS mentioned above. Had all of them at different times, sign of the times I can't get the engine codes right!
Was present at a rolling road session years ago with the car and car conversions pug 306 Rallye and it to delivered a lot more than the book figure as well and also they took it and the magazines ep3 type r civic to the nurbugring and the Peugeot crushed the civic quite conclusively.who would have thunk it eh.
Very intriguing I have an AX Sport TU24 1.3 the same as 205 Rallye and it sure feels like more than 95hp/103hp announced (the 205 Rallye had slightly longer intake ence the 8hp more suposely) I can tell you that much! I would love to see what it actually makes. Hopefully like 105/110 heheheh
Moreover, that last run was made with the lights on: the extra load on the electrical system would have been robbing power at the wheels. (I know, about 150 Watt max, but it's all about engagement. That, and the chance to begin a RUclips comment with the word "moreover".)
@@carcontrolcommitment Well, there you go, the way the numbers get rounded on this wall of champions means that that could make the difference of one horsepower. Which could mean a place, in the tightly packed mid-field.
I do love a rallye. 106s in general really, I was on the owners club years ago. I had an indy for 7.5 years. I do have a suspicion my twingo GT is making more than it's book figure. 1149cc single cam turbo, it's suppose to have 100bhp, but it feels quicker.
@@UPnDOWN I don't any Renault engines are wet belt. I think they are a mix of normal cam belt and chain. (That is one of the main reasons that makes me stick more to Renaults on the newer stuff). The later 1.2 that was in the clio / qashqai / pulsar / duster had an oil burning problem. But the older 1.2 tce was a good little engine. (In the twingo 2, clio 3, modus etc). It's the old the 1149cc D4F that was in the mk1 twingo, clio mk 1,2,3,4 etc. It's an old cast iron single cam engine from the 90's. They just slapped a turbo on it in the 00's. Renault have made things confusing that they have two completely different engines with the same name.
Oh please please dyno my S2 106! 1.6 8v NFT silver top, Ported Flowed cylinder head, billet flywheel, 421 manifold, remapped ÉCU and quite a bit more! Revs to 7500 :) I am in West Sussex lmk! I also have a 1.0 MK1 SPI with a 4 speed box too :)
My first car.. 106 gen2 (facelift) i think you called it but with the tower of power that was the 1.5 Diesel... could you find one of those and test lol
So, I’m more of a Renault man than the PSA side of French goodies. What happened with the 1.1 C2s? I had one, I knew someone else that also had one, and they were utterly gutless with the 1.1 engine. Was it purely down to weight of the car over the Saxo/106? Or did they add any electrical gubbins that slowed it down? I really liked the C2, it was ahead of its time especially on the interior. But my lord it was slow.
Very tempted to put one of these power plants in my Citroen C3…..currently it’s that asthmatic that it’s called “Pleurisy” rather than “Pluriel”……. 😂😂😂
Love me a TU, back in the day there was a rumour that the performance figures psa printed were from fully laden vehicles, and that the actual performance was much better, that might be how they hid the higher power figures?
I've heard quite a few rumours, but never known anything concrete. Peugeot and Citroen have different figures for the 106/Saxo, so that suggests something's off straight away as they should be pretty much the same.
Would be really interesting to see how the S1 rallye does. Surposubly simular power but a smaller 1.3. A mate had one and it was totally immature riot of a car. No low end what so ever - all it did below 4k was egg you on into pushing it a bit more and before you know it your at 7k again, woops. Only shopping car I’ve ever driven that never managed 30 mpg but it was an enjoyable way to burn fuel. Guess the S2 offers the same thrill but doesnt have to be driven that way if your not in the mood - better car but less character?
@@GoldenCroc more like it stood still for 12 years in a shed before being recommissioned. maybe its 100hp but still. dont actually know until i dyno it.
Could it be (you may have mentioned it beforehand) that the TU engine(s) need to loosen up a bit before they really give their best? I've (still) got a bike (a Honda VFR750) whose engine is like that: it had ~60,000km on it before it was really delivering.
This 106 Rallye is strange, on most I've seen it's an Aluminum Intake manifold with a quite big plenum for butterfly gas throttle body and the Air box with the filter is at the front.
Could these anomalies be related to gearing? Not a dyno expert but read that some people run in 3rd gear as this creates a higher and false reading to show off to their friends. If TU engined Peugeots have lower overall gearbox/final drive gearing then 4th gear might not be totally representative. Conversely, perhaps Bella Berlingo needed to be run in 3rd gear as being a diesel it has lower gearing (actually I doubt that as Bella is probably too far gone!).
Again, if it were the case it would apply to all cars. Had a Honda Beat on there a while back, with a 9000rpm rev limit - that had shorter gearing still, yet didn't overperform. All gears are geared down from a wheel output POV because of the final drive. 4th is normally the closest 1:1 on most cars - not all, but most - but it's still not a 1:1 output because of the FD ratio of the diff. I don't know how the dyno accounts for this, but it certainly seems to!
I wonder if these make the same power as a 205 GTI? From memory, those claimed 115bhp without a catalyst & 105 with. It also makes me wonder if adding a catalytic converter to a TU engine actually has any effect?
@@ferrumignis Thanks for the correction. For some reason I'd got this mixed up with the 106 XSi 1.6, also rated at 105 horsepower. Makes me wonder why the TU5 was never used in the 205?
i hope you are not comparing the mk1 rally with the mk2 mk1 100bhp 1.3 1993 to 97 mk2 103bhp 1.6 replaces the former 1998 with your dyno check they just seem to get better with age unless that engine has been tweaked
Combination of things: Lower friction and/or the possibility that the engines were underquoted when new for insurance/taxation reasons. Still possible for an engine to 'wear out', so once it gets to that stage the numbers start tumbling. I've had 250,000 mile engines on here that weren't worn out, though, so that figure really depends on the engine. A Rover V8 with 250k miles would have a completely ruined camshaft, for example.
Loving these Dyno vlogs Kitch - great fun
Used to work in the insurance biz, before getting into IT (thank God). The manufacturers always understate the horsepower for insurance and marketing reasons.
Insurance companies like limited HP and owners love getting something they did not expect...
Don't totally agree with that. Some might (fully believe Peugeot did, as they underquoted performance figures too) but some cars don't hit the numbers they're supposed to. Alfa Romeos and TVRs are two of the worst I've run on here for not hitting the numbers, and some Fords are pretty bad for it.
Worked for a tuning company a while back and my findings were:
Mustangs never hit their figures (400hp after a tune when the customer expects 440hp stock was always interesting).
N/A Mercedes engines used to be very similar, even some of the older AMGs would make less power (but always more torque) than claimed. Italian cars have been the worst for it my experience, naturally aspirated Ferraris and Maseratis would never even come close to their figures (with the exception of the 458, which is a technical marvel and very often showed bang on figures). Audi 4.2 V8s were also a culprit of not making claimed power even after a remap.
Conversely, BMWs and Porsches seem to be in the Peugeot camp of "Here's 10% more car than you thought you bought". The later Porsche GT3 cars are stupid and genuinely make 500hp+ stock from an N/A 4.0L every single time. C2 VTS, 206 GTi and pretty much every PSA car from that era would at least make it's figures, every one after that (with the Prince turbo 🤢) would really struggle and the torque curves were _disgusting_, peaky and sharp the whole way along.
I've never dynod a 106 so these are always fun to watch
Something about the old TU and XUD being such good units. We all just thought the cars were light so they were quick but this proves they were over performing.
Love these Dyno runs. Very impressed with these French engines. Back in 1996 i purchased a Golf 8V GTI, but just before, I drove a 1.6 205 GTI. The 205 just felt so much faster.
A bit lighter and a bit more powerful I suspect.
it was a lighter car and in 1.9 form frighteningly fast for the time
And this is the dyno that you thought had no further use...
Glad to see it in regular usage, the videos are strangely compelling!
Very clean exhaust this time, that's good to see.
From a business POV it has no real use here, but from a RUclips POV it's strangely brilliant! Vids are quicker and easier to edit, too. I could handle a lot more than I'm currently doing.
These Dyno videos are great, I enjoy them all thoroughly. Thanks for making them.
My pleasure!
Loving the fact it's an Isle of Wight car 😁👌
I am thankful for Hubnut for bringing me to UPnDown RUclips Channel. Peugeot, Renault and Citroen have all departed Canada in the 1980's, I really appreciate the fact that Kitch is keeping Peugeots and Citroens alive.
You are going to make me buy a 106, and I'm going to blame you
@@maxeluy I had a ‘Dumpit’ in Kingfisher blue as my first car. I regretted selling it in 2010 and still regret it now. Some gimp wrote it off a year later. I’d love to have another one!
Good luck finding a good one, cooking 106's are annoying rare compared to saxo vtr/s's
@@maxeluy i already have 2 and I want a 3rd one
Make sure you buy a 1.0...
A 106 rally is a very special car. Comparable to Renault clip Williams. Such great cars. The glory days of hot hatches imo.
Dumpits half wild cousin 😂
What a fantastic 106 Rallye!
One particular thing I remember from my 2001 Saxo 1.1 Asics, other than it going like mad, is that the starter motor was..........very eager as to always say: "Yay! Where are we going?, where are we going? C'mon mate, time to rev my tits off. like some jumpy spaniël. And the fact shifting gears was like stirring petrol(I believe a common issue)
Good to see the little cars with a big heart are doing well and it's from my place of birth the Isle of Wight
Allo! Your eldest has great taste in cars! My BMW E46 is my forever car but now with my own Dumpit (still on axle stands with a weird wheel bearing issue) in addition for local work, I can't see me ever needing another car. 106s are magical little things 😍
I have a phase 1 405 sri if you ever want to do an xuj9 let me know
Could be interested, drop me an email
I want one! Thanks for the video
I admire your self control - it took 11 1/2 minutes for the first (and only) HubNut slag to make it. Bravo Kitch!
I got 100mph out of my cinquecento 899cc and no one would believe me. The book says about 90..... 🤗👍🇮🇪
The car is 27 years old, so well run in 😂
that series 2 looks sooo good now
Does, doesn't it? They just look so 'right'.
OMG right up my street. Thank you for this video. Love one of these.
Good stuff, mate. keep em coming
I agree with the comment that some manufacturers understate their figures. A friend who was in the tuning industry for rallying said a lot of the Homologation cars under performed but it was very simple to make them over perform. Likewise many press cars were tweaked , Lotus for instance had better cams and the rev limiter"adjusted " , this did result in a few tired press cars after a while , but they were certainly impressive , a friend had an old Elan that went like the clappers but smoked, when it was finally overhauled did we find a big valve head and L1 ? cams. we were told it was an old development car that had been loaned out to the press.. Motor bikes were much the same , with a friend going to the bike show and saying to a man on the manufacturers stand that his bike did not go as expected , the man wrote down a part number and told him to order it off a dealer and it would eliminate " the flat spot "!! the resultant warp drive scared the hell out of me. So I'm pretty sure cars are tuned for which ever entity is going to set a standard......
Would love to get my Saxo VTS on your rolling road! Great video!
Already had one silver Saxo VTS on there!
Been looking for a saxo vts thanks to you. I went from hating peugeots to wanting to buy one
Your eldest has taste, 106 Rallye is sigma.
Top dyno test with a surprising result Rich.
Love that engine in all french cars. Its a belter
🔥🔥🔥 makes me want to throw mine on a dyno at some point and see how much it is under where it should be lmao
I would certainly like to see what my standard ZR 160 makes 🤔
Certainly food for thought with older cars proving they havent lost too many ponies
They dont lose any at all, in fact they gain. Its also been the case since the 1980s at least that cars dont "wear out" with normal driving in the way most people consider the meaning, in ways that could make them lose power. So if you have heard otherwise later than 1980s, you have been taken for a ride. Probably just outdated knowledge that lives on, like with many other things.
Some car magazines have done 125k mile dynotesting on lots of different cars since back then and all have shown same or better power than new.
The only engine that's ever gone bang on the dyno was a 160 VVC. Drop us an email (or not lol...)
@@GoldenCroc pxaxa, a good one, such a brilliant wishful thinking - increasing mileage, not loosing power, only gaining, wear (in essence physics+chemistry) is inexistent - u r genius, boi
@@bonifacijus11 Not for any mileage just about any car is likely to see, certainly in the UK, it doesnt drop because of "wearing out", no.
This has been, as said above, proven time and time again in empirical testing for decades.
As for the "physics+chemistry" part of your post, I can only assume your understanding of the factors at play in this regard is much too simple, leading you wrong.
I would suggest looking into it more, there are many studies about it and also a good chunk of plain old practical testing. On this very channel (and this video!) to start. Cheers mate.
Wish you had a 1.5 diesel 106 I had 1 as my first car would be interesting to see if that makes more than it should have. I know when i put a k&n air filter on it. It seemed to fly.
These Dyno runs are such fun to watch, makes me very curious how my the 206cc 1.6 16V i bought my parents would perform since it has a good punch to it up to about 6Ks..but then again theres a "Dyno" Right outside the house, but i would love a 106, dad had a blue low spec model (likely dumpit spec) when was young to move on from a Zafira/dodgy corsa b, i was a very happy passenger across speedbumps and tight roads! Though if one had money a 306 GTi6 would be nice..
I had the Saxo 1.6 Sport (VTR in some countries) with that 8V TU engine.
It was really fun and really torque - it was just pulling and pulling. There were a shitload of tuning kits especially for the 8V.
When I was young and stupid I didn’t like the S2 Rallye because I had an S1 Rallye and I thought the S2 was a bit lame in comparison.
Now I think the S2 is utterly, utterly fabulous and feel ashamed that I was a silly immature moron. 🤷♂️
S1 still better though ☺
I had a 1996 106 GTi back before I had the skills and confidence to push a car in anyway, but I do remember it being a hellova machine. There is currently a phase 2 Rallye like this one parked next to my cars which belongs to a neighbor, but I don't know where he lives and I don't feel like dropping a note on it to ask if it has a price on it. Oh how I miss that 106 GTi.
306 Rallye/GTI6 would be interesting too, I had one it made 149 hp with no obvious faults, supposed to be 167 hp..
That would be interesting. I've never dyno'd anything with the RS engine in. My old C4 VTS 180 actually made 173bhp (once I'd finished playing with it - started off at 165!)
Closest I've done is the 1.9 16v in the BX - lots of them. Always between 152-160bhp (book figure is 160). Nothing's over performed like the 106 has, but then they're not TU engines...
@@UPnDOWN Have you ever dyno'd anything with the TUD3 / TUD5 diesel engines? Not exactly a ball of fire, but would be interesting to see if the book figures were lower than they should be for them.
I have a 306 rallye but never had it on a dyno. It feels good to me for the 167bhp but you never know! Most I've seen back in the day did make standard or slightly over power. Sounds like you were unlucky!
No I've never run a TUD on there.
@@timgass5426 I think mine was cursed! HG blew the day I bought it and again about a year later. Peugeot main dealer who did it the first time set the timing wrong, gave it back to me sounding like a sewing machine with what felt like about 60hp.. Had a Lynx Rotrex supercharger conversion fitted, 260-270 hp, was v.fast but it blew up after 6 months as the garage who fitted it (who had a good reputation on the forums) cut corners/bodged stuff. I won't name Carl Grimsley from C.G cars in Leicester LE3 2FN as that wouldn't be fair. Glad to hear you've got a good one, they're lovely cars with a timeless design.
I had a Rallye phase 2 and I can confirm it was rapid as hell!
Love your channel. Great way to pass a tea break. Keep up the good work.
How about some dyno-ing some un-French 90’s motors as comparisons?
People seem to bring me French cars the most!
Interesting to see the difference between the v8 and the v16 gti
I overlaid them to show the owner on the day. The 16v just has more of everything, though the curve is steeper once the revs build. The 8v is more linear.
TU galore, I love it
Once did a downhill indicated 131 mpn in one of these lol, Felt like the grim reaper was within touch 😂
Very impressive.
Awesome run. Now you just need to get a 106 GTi on there to complete the collection.
Got the Saxo with the same engine on there, which is probably the closest so far.
@@UPnDOWN But following the current dyno logic, if it's in a 106 body it should make an additional 10hp+ on top again :)
Haha true!
Have you seen the new SM that Citroen (or DS) have built? I’m guessing it’s like the Peugeot 504 Coupe, Opel Manta and Renault 17 looky-likeys that have been shown in recent years: leccy one-offs that will never be sold.
If you want Dumpit in a fat suit to give it a go, I'd be happy to trot my 306 XSI down for a crack! Would love to know how accurate the 135hp figure is
Email me
Iv got a totally standard Peugeot 405 SRi that iv had from new that I'd love to see on your rolling road as iv always harboured a thought that it was more powerful than its original figures suggest???
That's the second one I've been offered in the comments - what are the chances?!
My Mitsubishi Lancer is supposed to have 98BHP, be lucky if it’s got 80😂. Still drives nice for an auto (now disabled 😢), can’t complain too much as I’ve kept it for 4yrs now😊
My old SLK 350 is up for breaking on a Dyno...🤔 Before the rust does...😅
would be sweet to get a GTi on it aswell at one point to see if there is a diffrence between the vts & the GTi
In theory there's no difference at all. The highest placed Saxo/106 on the leaderboard is a VTS-powered Saxo VTR with 128bhp. I've had another VTS on there before but for the life of me I can't find the graph.
@@UPnDOWN thats sad to hear. Although the State off healh might make a small impact & the vts & gti's having a slightly different gear ratios from what ik. A modified example would also have been intresting (not big mods like cams etc, just exhaust & intake to free it up a bit to see what difference it would make) although someone might already have done so without me knowing. Would be potensial for sone decent context. Next up in line i guess would be a 1L mk1 106 or a 1.4L 106 either mk2 or mk1 xsi
VTS and GTi have the same gear ratios, I think it was Clarkson who started the myth that they don't.
Awesome! Can you put on a dyno p106 with TU9M (37kW) engine?
I have one and I was wondering how much hp it has at this point…
I'd like to!
TU ( isn’t that Sainsbury’s 🧐) engine for the win 👏👍
We even got a beer brand with your image on it.
www.kordaatbier.nl/wp-content/uploads/Vector-Smart-Object-kopie%CC%88ren-4.jpg
Top Tip: Keep the bonnet open and you'll get another 7% of everything! 👌🏾
Fun! If you ever get the chance, do a run with an 1980's Audi 5cyl , they systematically UNDERperform. (2.3L: 134hp claimed and it hardly ever gets more then 125hp)
The only one I know of is an auto, sadly.
@@UPnDOWN I have a Passat GL5 with the JS 2.0 5 pot, with K-jet you could try, it's closer to Linwood than your rollers though...
Of all the 5 cylinder cars I've driven, the JS was my favourite. Would love to know how it looks on the dyno. The 7a engine is another I'd like to see. They were a bit of an oddball, with 20v head, naturally aspirated, it was really closest to a 5 cylinder version of the Mk.2 Golf GTI 16v KV engine. Early ones had a fantastic fabricated 5 to one equal length manifold which was substituted for a boring cast job on later cars, yet the book power figures stayed the same...
@@jncg2311wasn't 1.8 16v a KR engine?
@@mmllmmll22 You're quite right, I did mean KR. The KV was the 2.2l NA 5 cylinder concurrent to the JS mentioned above. Had all of them at different times, sign of the times I can't get the engine codes right!
Was present at a rolling road session years ago with the car and car conversions pug 306 Rallye and it to delivered a lot more than the book figure as well and also they took it and the magazines ep3 type r civic to the nurbugring and the Peugeot crushed the civic quite conclusively.who would have thunk it eh.
Yay, another TU on the dyno
Very intriguing I have an AX Sport TU24 1.3 the same as 205 Rallye and it sure feels like more than 95hp/103hp announced (the 205 Rallye had slightly longer intake ence the 8hp more suposely) I can tell you that much! I would love to see what it actually makes. Hopefully like 105/110 heheheh
Yeah I'd like to see one. Closest I've done was the 1.3 Rallye S1, which made 97.
@@UPnDOWN yes I believe it’s the same engine except for camshaft maybe, but EFI instead of the Weber carbs
Amazing content my friend!
@davidpereira2024 I discovered recently they aren't. One is based on the 1.1, the other on the 1.4;
Moreover, that last run was made with the lights on: the extra load on the electrical system would have been robbing power at the wheels. (I know, about 150 Watt max, but it's all about engagement. That, and the chance to begin a RUclips comment with the word "moreover".)
Having the lights on will cost it half a horsepower. I know I measured it myself once in a rolling road
@@carcontrolcommitment Well, there you go, the way the numbers get rounded on this wall of champions means that that could make the difference of one horsepower. Which could mean a place, in the tightly packed mid-field.
I do love a rallye. 106s in general really, I was on the owners club years ago. I had an indy for 7.5 years.
I do have a suspicion my twingo GT is making more than it's book figure. 1149cc single cam turbo, it's suppose to have 100bhp, but it feels quicker.
Learned the other day some of those are wet belt engines. *Shudder*
@@UPnDOWN I don't any Renault engines are wet belt. I think they are a mix of normal cam belt and chain. (That is one of the main reasons that makes me stick more to Renaults on the newer stuff).
The later 1.2 that was in the clio / qashqai / pulsar / duster had an oil burning problem.
But the older 1.2 tce was a good little engine. (In the twingo 2, clio 3, modus etc). It's the old the 1149cc D4F that was in the mk1 twingo, clio mk 1,2,3,4 etc. It's an old cast iron single cam engine from the 90's. They just slapped a turbo on it in the 00's.
Renault have made things confusing that they have two completely different engines with the same name.
Oh please please dyno my S2 106! 1.6 8v NFT silver top, Ported Flowed cylinder head, billet flywheel, 421 manifold, remapped ÉCU and quite a bit more! Revs to 7500 :) I am in West Sussex lmk! I also have a 1.0 MK1 SPI with a 4 speed box too :)
Definitely interested in the 1.0, email me.
Would be nice to see a ES9-engine to be put through it's paces. Like Mr. HubNut would put it. The old "190" and newer "210". Please make it happen :D
Yes, I would too. They do go well. Sadly I don't have a car to test!
Impressive little Rallye Rich does not look like its got 125k on the clock.
My first car.. 106 gen2 (facelift) i think you called it but with the tower of power that was the 1.5 Diesel... could you find one of those and test lol
When PSA could make decent engines, had xud and TU engine cars , superb engines.
So, I’m more of a Renault man than the PSA side of French goodies. What happened with the 1.1 C2s? I had one, I knew someone else that also had one, and they were utterly gutless with the 1.1 engine. Was it purely down to weight of the car over the Saxo/106? Or did they add any electrical gubbins that slowed it down? I really liked the C2, it was ahead of its time especially on the interior. But my lord it was slow.
C2 was a fair bit heavier, and I suspect probably taller geared for economy/emissions, though I could be wrong on that. Same engine as Dumpit, though!
Very tempted to put one of these power plants in my Citroen C3…..currently it’s that asthmatic that it’s called “Pleurisy” rather than “Pluriel”……. 😂😂😂
Better off with the C2 VTS engine, it'll go in with less work needed and make 125-130bhp.
@@UPnDOWN cheers for the advice Rich!👌 I’ll have to keep an eye open for one after I finish the Wolseley…… nice little job for the spring
As you seem to love the 106, I am contemplating bringing my 16v swapped race Rallye down for a power run. What’s she do mister?
Love me a TU, back in the day there was a rumour that the performance figures psa printed were from fully laden vehicles, and that the actual performance was much better, that might be how they hid the higher power figures?
I've heard quite a few rumours, but never known anything concrete. Peugeot and Citroen have different figures for the 106/Saxo, so that suggests something's off straight away as they should be pretty much the same.
Mine made 110 back in the day std. at like 25k miles, I don’t remember when you drove it though 🤣
It was quite a long time ago, to be fair...
Would be really interesting to see how the S1 rallye does. Surposubly simular power but a smaller 1.3. A mate had one and it was totally immature riot of a car. No low end what so ever - all it did below 4k was egg you on into pushing it a bit more and before you know it your at 7k again, woops. Only shopping car I’ve ever driven that never managed 30 mpg but it was an enjoyable way to burn fuel. Guess the S2 offers the same thrill but doesnt have to be driven that way if your not in the mood - better car but less character?
The S1 I had managed 97bhp and about 80lbft @ 5000rpm. The S2 is a good deal quicker, if not slightly less characterful.
Bet the 106 prices are going up now!
Cos it's been on my dyno? Well, yeah, I am an iNfLueNSer now
I so want to see you do a TUD..
Yeah, that would be interesting!
Would love to know if my Volvo 480 could get at least close to bella. Quoted 110hp when new but im guessing its closer to 85 honestly.
If that is the case, something in the engine is broken, since I cant believe they will overrate them *that* badly...?
@@GoldenCroc more like it stood still for 12 years in a shed before being recommissioned. maybe its 100hp but still. dont actually know until i dyno it.
Is it manual? Happy to run it.
@@UPnDOWN yeah Manual 2ltr. if I find myself in the depth of England one day in it ill send you a message. im all the way up in Scotland.
Could it be (you may have mentioned it beforehand) that the TU engine(s) need to loosen up a bit before they really give their best? I've (still) got a bike (a Honda VFR750) whose engine is like that: it had ~60,000km on it before it was really delivering.
I'm not sure it is. Dumpit's only done 43k, for example.
It's due the little stripes on the front clearly.
Some said these had 120hp at the best stock form
I can believe it.
I do not give a flying duck what anyone says this little 106 is cool :D
I ought to bring you my 2004 1 litre Toyota Yaris, just so it could be shown to produce the sort of figures that'd make Hubnut feel better...
Same engine as the Sirion isn't it?
I have a 106, 1.5D and I think it's also quicker then it should be, if it's possible try to test it out to confirm it
Bring it on
@@UPnDOWN I can't cose I'm from Malta and it's at the mechanic's, I'm fitting a turbo on it
i have a gti6 ready to dyno if you want :)
Is it leaking a bit between the mid exhaust section and the rear box?
Not that I know of?
Rally FTW
This 106 Rallye is strange, on most I've seen
it's an Aluminum Intake manifold with a quite big plenum for butterfly gas throttle body and the Air box with the filter is at the front.
You're thinking of a S1 Rallye.
Which tu enginge is it? TU5?
Curious how much would my 1.0 CDZ with 50hp/37kw would measure!!
No idea what a CDZ is!
I reckon my 1.6 Fiesta would give it some competition on the power front….but maybe not 10bhp more than factory 😂
We can try it.
@@UPnDOWN ok just let me know when 👍🏻
I see I had no idea of what my Fiesta could do 😂
The Dyno is over reading 😄
Did you do it in the silly voice though?!
It would have been interesting to put that inlet pipe on Dumpit...
Doesn't fit.
Could these anomalies be related to gearing? Not a dyno expert but read that some people run in 3rd gear as this creates a higher and false reading to show off to their friends. If TU engined Peugeots have lower overall gearbox/final drive gearing then 4th gear might not be totally representative. Conversely, perhaps Bella Berlingo needed to be run in 3rd gear as being a diesel it has lower gearing (actually I doubt that as Bella is probably too far gone!).
Again, if it were the case it would apply to all cars. Had a Honda Beat on there a while back, with a 9000rpm rev limit - that had shorter gearing still, yet didn't overperform.
All gears are geared down from a wheel output POV because of the final drive. 4th is normally the closest 1:1 on most cars - not all, but most - but it's still not a 1:1 output because of the FD ratio of the diff.
I don't know how the dyno accounts for this, but it certainly seems to!
@@UPnDOWN Thanks for the info. Useful.
I wonder if these make the same power as a 205 GTI? From memory, those claimed 115bhp without a catalyst & 105 with. It also makes me wonder if adding a catalytic converter to a TU engine actually has any effect?
Very similar power, though the 205 GTi had the XU engine, not the TU.
@@ferrumignis Thanks for the correction. For some reason I'd got this mixed up with the 106 XSi 1.6, also rated at 105 horsepower. Makes me wonder why the TU5 was never used in the 205?
@@Jam3sA The TU5 wasn't introduced until 2000, and the last year of 205 production was 1997.
@@ferrumignis Now I know that's wrong, as you could get it in a pre-facelift 106 so that's before 1996
@@Jam3sA Was the 106 and the 205 in production at the same time?
Your dyno is over reading 😝😉
Didn’t the mk2 golf 1.6 make more power after 60000 miles than it did new? It seems some cars get better with miles on them
Quite possibly.
i hope you are not comparing the mk1 rally with the mk2 mk1 100bhp 1.3 1993 to 97 mk2 103bhp 1.6 replaces the former 1998 with your dyno check they just seem to get better with age unless that engine has been tweaked
I'm just doing exactly what I said in the video.
Is it bossible, that they got more power now than when they were new?
Certainly, engines loosen up with use so frictional losses reduce.
Combination of things: Lower friction and/or the possibility that the engines were underquoted when new for insurance/taxation reasons.
Still possible for an engine to 'wear out', so once it gets to that stage the numbers start tumbling. I've had 250,000 mile engines on here that weren't worn out, though, so that figure really depends on the engine. A Rover V8 with 250k miles would have a completely ruined camshaft, for example.
I have a 1974 1275 "A Series" MG Midget, would you be interested in R R it
Sure thing! Drop me an email.
I'll think you'll find mileage is a word.
Some motors loosen up with miles, old vw's did it back in the day
All do, as long as they haven't worn out at the same time.
now you need to find a Saxo Electrique and compare that
Haha that would be funny! Probably pointless, but the torque curve would be interesting.
Thought the 106 rallye was a 1.3 tu
The S1 is.
I bet if I put my 206sw 1.4i on there it would probably under perform.
8v? It'd probably do roughly what it's meant to, assuming it's in good health. Don't think it would overperform much.
Watched this video again and it sounds like it’s has a different cam in, either that or your microphone is reverberating.
Which do you think is more likely...?
@@UPnDOWN microphone