406 vs 407

they look brill

The press thought the 406 was a stunning new car when it was launched. It set new standards in all sorts of areas. It was refined, rode well, handled brilliantly and looked superb. It still is and does. The 407 improves on the lacklustre interior and poor crash safety of the

406. But by all accounts it doesn't ride as well. And where the 406 is svelte, well proportioned and timeless, the 407 is all clumsy overhangs and cartoon swoops. It's definitely a case of form over function, especially since that long snout didn't reap any rewards in terms of pedestrian safety like it was supposed to. And have you seen the coupé? Looks like a Pontiac or a Buick, and when you think how beautiful the 406 coupé is... The 406 was way ahead of its rivals on launch. The 407 is already behind its rivals. Peugeot is off the pace at the moment for sure.

Androo

As a 407 owner I disagree. Never had a 406, by previous car was a 306. But the 407 is the first car in its class that I have driven that is a better drive than a Mondeo (at least with the Hdi 136).

Compared to the 407, the 306 feels like driving a tractor. My only disappointment with the 407 has been fuel consumption, which has been consistently been about 10mpg less than I expected, But today I drove from Leicester to Peterborough and back (about 80 miles) with the climate control off and didnt reset the trip computer till I got clear of Leicester and its traffic lights. I got 44mpg, which is a lot better than the average of 37 that I was getting.

The 407 handles superbly and goes well, even if you can almost see the fuel gauge dropping if you use the performance. But I suspect the 406 was the same in this respect.

I had a ride in a 406 airport taxi recently, and the driver said he could get

46mpg from the HDI engine, but nearly all his driving was on motorways at a constant 70mph. BNasically he drove very gently, and I think you need to do the same with the 407 to get good fuel consumption.

Martin