Peugeot 306

Peugeot 306: which version to buy

If you are choosing a Peugeot 306 Cabrio rather than reading a general overview, the useful split is not “generation versus generation” — this catalogue lists 1 generation only (March 1993–September 2002, body Cabrio) — but which named version under that one generation. Twelve versions are shown here (the catalogue records 75 in total; the other 63 are not in this dataset).

If you are choosing a Peugeot 306 Cabrio rather than reading a general overview, the useful split is not “generation versus generation” — this catalogue lists 1 generation only (March 1993–September 2002, body Cabrio) — but which named version under that one generation. Twelve versions are shown here (the catalogue records 75 in total; the other 63 are not in this dataset). All twelve are Gasoline, Inline 4, Front, transverse, FWD, boost No, tank 60 L. The decision is then horsepower, gearbox, weight, 0–100, and whether economy is measured.

Buy the 1.6 MT (109 hp) if you want the strongest 1.6 with mixed consumption 8.5 L/100 km and 0–100 in 11.2 s at the same 1210 kg as the 89 hp 1.6 MT. Buy the 2.0 MT (121 hp) if the measured sprint matters most (10.8 s). Buy the 1.9 MT (121 hp) if top speed is the target (197 km/h) and you accept a lighter 1150 kg car that stopped in September 2000. Skip the 1.1 MT (60 hp) unless you only need the smallest engine: 18.4 s to 100 km/h and 155 km/h, kerb weight not measured. Automatics exist as 1.8 AT, 2.0 AT, and 1.9 AT — none of them is the fastest 0–100 in this set.

Generations

There is 1 generation of Peugeot 306 in these data. Do not treat the Cabrio as a later numbered generation: the field is 1 generation, start 1993-03-01, stop 2002-09-30, body Cabrio.

Inside that generation, production windows split the list:

• Eight versions run to 2002-09-30: both 1.6 MT (89 hp and 109 hp), both 2.0 MT (121 hp and 132 hp), 1.8 AT (101 hp), 1.8 MT (110 hp), and 1.8 MT (101 hp, 1140 kg).
• Four versions stop two years earlier, 2000-09-30: 2.0 AT (132 hp), 1.1 MT (60 hp), 1.8 MT (101 hp, 1100 kg), 1.9 AT (121 hp), 1.9 MT (121 hp).

If you need a Cabrio still listed through September 2002, drop the 1.1 / 1.9 pair and the 2.0 AT. If you will accept a September 2000 cutoff, the 1.9 MT (121 hp) and 1.9 AT (121 hp) become available, and they are among the lightest 121 hp cars here.

Engines and specs

Every version below is named exactly as in the database. Two 1.6 MT, two 2.0 MT, and three 1.8 MT share names and must be told apart by power (and, for the 101 hp manuals, by kerb weight).

Injection on the listed engines is Distributed injection (multi-point) where that field is present. Compression and bore × stroke are measured on some rows and not measured on others: 1.6 MT both 89 and 109 hp use compression 11 and 78.5 × 82; 1.8 MT 110 hp uses 10 and 83 × 81.4; 1.8 AT 9.3 / 83 × 81.4; 1.8 MT 101 hp (1140 kg) 9.2 / 83 × 81.4; 2.0 MT 132 hp 10.4 / 86 × 86. Compression and bore × stroke are not measured on 2.0 MT (121 hp) and 2.0 AT (132 hp).

Specific output from the same displacement figures:

• 1.6 MT 89 hp: 56.1 hp/L. 1.6 MT 109 hp: 68.7 hp/L — +12.6 hp/L for the same 1587 cc.
• 1.8 MT 110 hp: 62.5 hp/L. The 101 hp 1.8 MT / 1.8 AT pair: 57.3 hp/L.
• 2.0 MT 121 hp: 60.6 hp/L. 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT 132 hp: 66.1 hp/L.
• 1.9 MT / 1.9 AT 121 hp: 63.5 hp/L from 1905 cc — more hp per litre than the 1998 cc 2.0 MT (121 hp).
• 1.1 MT 60 hp: 53.4 hp/L, the lowest in this set.

The 1.6 MT (109 hp) is the densest engine here. The 2.0 MT (132 hp) is the peak horsepower. The 2.0 MT (121 hp) is not the peak power 2.0, but it makes 176 Nm already at 2750 rpm, 1450 rpm earlier than the 132 hp 2.0’s 180 Nm at 4200.

Performance and economy

0–100 km/h, top speed, and L/100 km (city / highway / mixed). Where the cell is empty in the source, it is written not measured.

Arithmetic that actually changes a purchase:

• 1.6 MT 109 vs 89 hp: +20 hp, +12 Nm, −3.8 s to 100, +11 km/h. Same 1210 kg. The 109 hp car is the one with mixed 8.5 L/100 km; the 89 hp car’s consumption is not measured, so you cannot claim it is cheaper to run from these numbers.
• 2.0 MT 121 hp vs 2.0 MT 132 hp: the 132 hp car has +11 hp and +4 Nm but is 0.3 s slower to 100 (11.1 vs 10.8) and only +2 km/h on top speed (196 vs 194). Extra power here does not buy a quicker sprint in this dataset.
• 2.0 MT 121 hp vs 1.6 MT 109 hp: +12 hp, +29 Nm, −0.4 s, +5 km/h, +50 kg. The 1.6 has the only mixed figure among these two (8.5); the 2.0’s consumption is not measured.
• 1.8 MT 110 hp vs 1.6 MT 109 hp: +1 hp, +8 Nm, but +1.3 s slower and the same 189 km/h, +40 kg, mixed 8.6 vs 8.5. The 1.6 (109 hp) wins this comparison on the measured stopwatch and on mixed fuel.
• 1.8 MT 101 hp (1100 kg) vs 1.8 MT 101 hp (1140 kg): same 101 hp and 153 Nm; the 1100 kg car is 0.4 s quicker (12.2 vs 12.6) and +3 km/h (185 vs 182). It ends in 2000-09-30.
• 1.8 AT vs 1.8 MT (101 hp, 1140 kg): identical 12.6 s and 182 km/h. The automatic does not add a measured acceleration penalty here; it does add a 4-speed Automatic versus 5-speed Manual, +80 kg (1220 vs 1140), and rear Disc plus 130 mm clearance versus rear Drum and 110 mm.
• 1.9 MT vs 1.9 AT, both 121 hp: manual is 1.5 s quicker (11.2 vs 12.7) and +4 km/h (197 vs 193). That is the largest auto-versus-manual gap among pairs that share displacement and power in this list.
• 2.0 AT (132 hp): top speed 195 km/h, mixed 9.4 L/100 km, 0–100 not measured. It is the only version specified on 92 fuel rather than 95. You cannot rank its sprint against the 2.0 MT (132 hp) 11.1 s because one figure is missing.
• 1.1 MT: 18.4 s and 155 km/h — 7.6 s and 42 km/h behind the next-slowest measured pair (1.6 MT 89 hp: 15.0 s / 178). Four-speed Manual, not five.

Only three versions have a full city/highway/mixed set: 1.6 MT (109 hp) 11.9 / 6.6 / 8.5, 1.8 MT (110 hp) 12.2 / 6.5 / 8.6, 2.0 AT (132 hp) 13.6 / 7.1 / 9.4. Among those three, the 109 hp 1.6 is the lowest mixed and city figure; the 110 hp 1.8 is 0.1 L/100 km lower on the highway (6.5 vs 6.6). The automatic 2.0 is +0.9 mixed versus the 1.6. For the other nine versions, consumption is not measured — do not infer mpg from silence.

Dimensions and weight

Wheel sizes are not measured on every version in this extract. Fuel tank is 60 L on all twelve. Ground clearance is 110, 120, or 130 mm.

Front suspension is Independent, spring and front brakes Ventilated disc on every version that records them. 1.1 MT rear brakes are not measured.

kg per horsepower (kerb ÷ hp), skipping 1.1 MT because kerb is not measured:

• Lightest per hp: 1.9 AT 9.43 kg/hp (1141/121), 1.9 MT 9.50, 2.0 MT / 2.0 AT 132 hp 9.62.
• Mid: 2.0 MT 121 hp 10.41, 1.8 MT 101 hp (1100 kg) 10.89, 1.6 MT 109 hp 11.10, 1.8 MT 101 hp (1140 kg) 11.29, 1.8 MT 110 hp 11.36.
• Heaviest per hp: 1.8 AT 12.08, 1.6 MT 89 hp 13.60.

Gross-to-kerb payload (gross − kerb) is largest on 1.8 MT (101 hp, 1100 kg) at 525 kg and 1.9 AT at 534 kg; smallest on 2.0 MT (121 hp) at 350 kg. 1.1 MT payload is not measured.

Clearance 110 mm is tied to the 109 hp 1.6 MT, the 110 hp 1.8 MT, and the 1140 kg 1.8 MT. Clearance 120 mm appears only on the 89 hp 1.6 MT. The rest sit at 130 mm. If you want the higher figure, you are not looking at the 109 hp 1.6.

Which version to choose

There is no second generation to “step up” into. The extra you pay (prices are not measured in this dataset) is extra displacement, extra hp, an Automatic, or a later-ending production window.

If the measured 0–100 is the buying rule: 2.0 MT (121 hp) at 10.8 s. Next are 2.0 MT (132 hp) 11.1 s, then 1.6 MT (109 hp) and 1.9 MT (121 hp) both 11.2 s. The 132 hp 2.0 does not repay its +11 hp versus the 121 hp 2.0 on the sprint; it does repay it on top speed by 2 km/h and on kg/hp (9.62 vs 10.41).

If top speed is the buying rule: 1.9 MT (121 hp) at 197 km/h, then 2.0 MT (132 hp) 196, 2.0 AT 195, 2.0 MT (121 hp) 194, 1.9 AT 193. The 1.9 manual beats every 2.0 on the speedo in this table, and it is 110 kg lighter than the 132 hp 2.0 MT (1150 vs 1270). It ends 2000-09-30.

If you want the 1.6 and will keep it to 2002: take 1.6 MT (109 hp), not 1.6 MT (89 hp). Same name, same 1587 cc, same 1210 / 1640 kg, same 5-speed Manual. The 109 hp version is 20 hp and 3.8 s quicker, 68.7 vs 56.1 hp/L, 11.10 vs 13.60 kg/hp, and it is the only 1.6 with mixed 8.5 L/100 km. What the 89 hp car uniquely has is 120 mm clearance (10 mm more than the 109) and a Semi-independent, spring rear versus Independent, spring. That is the whole measured trade.

If you want a 1.8: three manuals share the name 1.8 MT. The 110 hp car (1761 cc, 4 valves/cyl) is the only 1.8 with mixed 8.6 L/100 km, but it is slower to 100 than the 109 hp 1.6 (12.5 vs 11.2) at +40 kg. The two 101 hp 1.8 MT cars (1762 cc, 2 valves/cyl) differ by 40 kg: 1140 kg through 2002, or 1100 kg through 2000 with 12.2 s / 185 km/h. The 1.8 AT matches the heavier 101 hp manual on 12.6 s / 182 km/h; buy it only for the 4-speed Automatic, not for speed.

If you want an automatic: three exist. 1.8 AT (101 hp) has a measured 12.6 s. 1.9 AT (121 hp) is 12.7 s — 0.1 s slower despite +20 hp, because it is compared with a different engine and 1141 kg. 2.0 AT (132 hp) has 0–100 not measured and mixed 9.4. Rank automatics by what is actually timed: 1.8 AT then 1.9 AT; do not invent a 0–100 for 2.0 AT. 2.0 AT is the only 92-fuel row.

If you want the lightest measured kerb: 1.8 MT (101 hp, 1100 kg), then 1.9 AT 1141, 1.8 MT (101 hp, 1140 kg) 1140, 1.9 MT 1150. All four of those except the 1140 kg 1.8 end in 2000 except wait: 1140 kg 1.8 MT runs to 2002. The 1100 kg 1.8 and both 1.9s stop in 2000.

If you want rear Disc rather than Drum: 2.0 MT (both), 2.0 AT, 1.8 AT, 1.9 AT, 1.9 MT. The 1.6s and the 1.8 manuals use Drum. 1.1 MT rear brakes not measured.

If you want the smallest engine: only 1.1 MT (60 hp, 1124 cc, 4-speed Manual). It is the slowest and lowest-speed car in the extract, with kerb, gross, consumption, CO2, eco class, and wheels all not measured. It is a 2000 cutoff car.

Problems and reliability. This dataset does not list fault rates, rust, hood mechanism life, or service intervals. Those items are not measured. What you can use instead is the mechanical spread: 2-valve versus 4-valve heads on the 1.8s, Drum versus Disc at the rear, Independent, spring versus Semi-independent, spring at the rear, and whether consumption was recorded at all. Do not treat a missing consumption figure as proof of a frugal engine.

Short list from the numbers only

1. Daily Cabrio with a measured mixed figure and a 2002 end date: 1.6 MT (109 hp). 2. Fastest timed 0–100: 2.0 MT (121 hp). 3. Highest top speed, accept a 2000 end date: 1.9 MT (121 hp). 4. Peak hp in a 2002 manual: 2.0 MT (132 hp) — buy it for 132 hp / 196 km/h, not because it beats the 121 hp 2.0 to 100 (it does not). 5. Automatic with a timed sprint and a 2002 window: 1.8 AT (101 hp). 6. Lightest 101 hp manual, 2000 window: 1.8 MT (101 hp, 1100 kg). 7. Avoid as a performance choice: 1.6 MT (89 hp) and 1.1 MT (60 hp).

That is the whole choice set these twelve rows support. Prices are not measured; wheels are not measured; CO2 and eco class are not measured. Any ranking beyond hp, seconds, kg, mm, and L/100 km would be outside the data.