Talk:Peugeot 505

There is no such motoring journalist as “Archie Vicar”. He is a satirical creation of driventowrite.com. His supposedly in-period reviews are ascribed to non-existent journals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:BC15:9501:F8A4:7A99:F7CA:CBC9 (talk) 13:47, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Just realised that as well as the text referenced in footnote 16, footnotes 11, 12 & 13 all *also* refer to false attributions to non-existent journals of satirical writing on driventowrite.com attributed there to “Archie Vicar”.

Well played the satirist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A00:23C7:BC15:9501:F8A4:7A99:F7CA:CBC9 (talk) 13:57, 18 February 2023 (UTC)

Info to be re-included

There's a few bits of info amongst this lot (taken from 4 November 2005 version) which was removed by User:Jamieli's cleanup. Someone needs to go through and add some of this lost info back in - i've not got time right now.

Please delete this from talk page once all lost info (e.g. acceleration times) is re-integrated into article Spute 11:10, 30 November 2005 (UTC)

The Peugeot 505 was a large automobile, which was produced by Peugeot in France from 1978 until 1991, replacing the Peugeot 504. It was one of the last Peugeot models to be sold in the United States, with sales ending there in 1991. Both the sedan (saloon) and station wagon (estate) remain popular in Africa, where they are still locally assembled, and are used as long-distance bush taxis. They were also sold in Australia and New Zealand and many are still in daily use. Peugeot 505 production began to wind down following the launch of the 405 at the end of 1987, and production ended in 1991 some time after the introduction of the 605.

The 505 was noted for its very good ride and handling, especially on rough and unmade roads; perhaps one reason for its popularity in less developed countries.

The saloon's length is 458 cm (180.3 in), its height is 145 cm (57.1 in) and its width is 172 cm (67.7 in). Depending on the model, its weight is between 1,210 kg and 1,380 kg.

This car was available with both diesel and petrol engines. The diesel engines were all 4-cylinder. Early models used the 67 hp (49 kW) 2304cc engine used on the Ford Sierra, and later models had a 2500cc engine that produced 95 hp (70 kW) or 108 hp (79 kW) with a turbocharger and intercooler. The petrol engines had either 4 cylinders or 6 cylinders. The normal 2.0 L engine had 96 hp (71 kW), the OHC 2.0 L engine had 110 hp (81 kW), the 505 GTI a 2.2 L 4-cylinder engine with 130 hp (96 kW), the 505 V6 a 6-cylinder 2.8 L engine with 170 hp (125 kW), and the 505 Turbo Injection (TI) had a 2.2 L turbocharged engine producing 180 hp (132 kW).

Of the diesel engines, the 95 hp (70 kW) GTD Turbo accelerates from 0–100km/h (0–62 mph) in 14 seconds and has a top speed of 171 km/h (106–mph), while the 110 hp (82 kW) GTD Turbo Intercooler accelerates in 12.5 seconds and has a top speed of 178 km/h (111 mph). Of the petrol 505s, the GTI accelerates in 11.0 seconds and has a top speed of 185 km/h (115 mph), the V6 accelerates in 9.0 seconds and has a top speed of 200 km/h (124 mph), and the Turbo Injection accelerates in 8.2 seconds and has a top speed of just under 215 km/h (134 mph).

The 505 varied very much in luxury depending on the model. Base SRD cars with the 2305 cc diesel engine didn't even have power steering, but the GTD Turbo, the GTI, the V6 and the TI all had power steering, central locking doors, air conditioning, a 5-speed manual transmission, moonroof (except the GTD Turbo), and front fog lights. In the V6, the power steering was speed sensitive, the central locking doors came with an infrared remote, and the heating and ventiliation systems included climate control.

The 505 was very spacious inside because of the car's height. A 3-speed automatic transmission was available on early 505s, which was later replaced a 4-speed unit. Mechanically speaking, the strongest 505 was the GTD with a 5-speed manual transmission.

The 505 had very good ground clearance, and in the 1980s, Dangel made a four wheel drive version of the 505 estate equipped with either the intercooled turbodiesel 110 hp (81 kW) engine or the 130 hp 2.2 L petrol (96 kW) engine. The four wheel drive 505 had short gear ratios.

In some countries such as France and Germany, the 505 estate was used as an ambulance, a funeral car, police car, military vehicle and as a road maintenance vehicle. There were prototypes of 505 coupés and 505 pickup trucks, and in France many people have made pickups themselves out of old 505s. It is a very tough vehicle, available with galvanized steel body panels since 1985, and the 2.5 L turbodiesel engine is known to have done over 500,000 km (310,000 mi) before having to be rebuilt. It is also common to find cars with the 2.0 L OHC and V6 engines which have done in excess of 300,000 km (185,000 mi) without requiring rebuilding. The diesels also get excellent fuel economy: the GTD Turbo gets 4.8 L/100 km at 90 km/h (49 mpg at 56 mph), 5.9 L/100 km at 120 km/h (40 mpg at 75 mph), and 6.6 L/100 km (36 mpg) in city driving. In some respects, some of the petrol engines, however, are a disaster: the turbocharged fuel injected engine, at 200 km/h, consumes nearly 40 L/100km (5.9 mpg at 124 mph).

Production in Africa

Is the 505 really made in Africa? Peugeot Nigeria and Peugeot Kenya both offer the 504 alongside more recent models, but not the 505. Perhaps they made the 505 before switching to the 406. --GagHalfrunt 17:58, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

File:Peugeot 505 Turbo Familiale 1991.jpg Nominated for Deletion

An image used in this article, File:Peugeot 505 Turbo Familiale 1991.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Media without a source as of 25 February 2012 What should I do? Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so. If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use) If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used. To take part in any discussion, or to review a more detailed deletion rationale please visit the relevant image page (File:Peugeot 505 Turbo Familiale 1991.jpg) This is Bot placed notification, another user has nominated/tagged the image --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:18, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

Infobox image

Isn't there a better picture for the article sidebar than an estate with creased body panels?--74.215.242.83 (talk) 09:48, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

There aren't a lot of images which show a vehicle clearly and from the correct angle without extraneous clutter, and I don't think it matters that the previous image was an estate. However the damaged door panel wasn't ideal, so I've changed the image. PaleCloudedWhite (talk) 10:43, 21 July 2014 (UTC)

MOS:Units of Measurement

Mr.choppers The manual of style states:

• In non-scientific articles with strong ties to the United States, the primary units are US customary (pounds, miles, feet, inches, etc.)
• In non-scientific articles with strong ties to the United Kingdom, the primary units for most quantities are metric or other internationally used units, except that:
  • UK engineering-related articles, including those on bridges and tunnels, generally use the system of units in which the subject project was drawn up (but road distances are given in imperial units, with a metric conversion – see next bullet);
  • the primary units for distance/​length, speed and fuel consumption are miles, miles per hour, and miles per imperial gallon (except for short distances or lengths, where miles are too large for practical use);
  • the primary units for personal height and weight are feet​/inches and stones/​pounds;
  • imperial pints are used for quantities of draught beer/​cider and bottled milk;
• In all other articles, the primary units chosen will be SI units (such as kilograms), non-SI units officially accepted for use with the SI, or such other units as are conventional in reliable-source discussions of the article topic (such as revolutions per minute (rpm) for rotational speed, hands for heights of horses, etc.)

The way I read the above is that this vehicle is French, designed in France and manufactured in France and other countries but not the United States and shipped not only to the United States but many other places on the planet. It therefore falls under all other articles. Wikipedia is for a worldwide audience therefore the unit used for power should be kilowatt not horsepower. Can you explain why you think it should be your choice and not mine to use horsepower? Anyone can pick and choose a source for units, the fact that they may not have used units we use today is irrelevant. the convert template is more accurate than an editors conversion but you revert my addition of convert templates. Avi8tor (talk) 12:34, 2 June 2024 (UTC)

Conversions first: I replaced your conversions with more precise ones - the car was built to metric horsepower, and output was 110 metric hp/81kW. You wrote {{cvt|81|kW}}, which produces 81 kW (109 hp) whereas I changed it to {{cvt|110|hp-metric|kW|0|disp=flip}} which produces 81 kW (110 hp). I disagree with leading for kW for a car which was only ever by described by the manufacturer using metric horsepower. Sources show kilowatts in parentheses, if at all. You changed the output to imperial horsepower, a unit never used by Peugeot on European-market cars, and creating a number which does not appear in references (109hp). I explained this to you two years ago on your talk page. It is also made very clear at MOS:UNIT that we do not convert a unit and then place it in a conversion template:

To avoid problems with rounding and significant figures, for input to conversion templates use only the original quantity found in reliable sources, not one that a source has already converted.

As for using hp for the US-market 505s: This section has a close tie to the US. The cars were heavily reengineered for the US market; all engines have different specs, the sheet metal is different. All reliable sources, period or not, use (non-metric) horsepower to describe them. Whether you are looking at published road tests, books, period publications, you will find that horsepower is the unit used.

In all other articles, the primary units chosen will be SI units (such as kilograms), non-SI units officially accepted for use with the SI, or such other units as are conventional in reliable-source discussions of the article topic (such as revolutions per minute (rpm) for rotational speed, hands for heights of horses, etc.)

For the reader, the difference between metric and imperial horsepower is a slight but important distinction, and having the wrong numbers will lead to never ending changes, confusion, and mis-conversions. Describing a US-market car with kW leading is misguiding and historically correct, violates the guidelines and contradicts all reliable sources on the topic.  Mr.choppers | ✎  00:06, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

Mr.choppers Lets go thru this one by one, I think you are picking and choosing an alternative narrative than that stated in the MOS, The Manual of Style is supposed to prevent edit warring due to differences in units used in different countries, If it’s from the US or the UK then use horsepower primary, if it’s made elsewhere use SI primary, regardless of where you get your information from. Anyone can pick and choose a source that fits their narrative, Historical units are irrelevant, we don’t describe the pyramids using cubits, but you could include cubits in parentheses.

Nowhere in the original article did it state metric horsepower or PS, So any reader worldwide would assume it was referring to Imperial horsepower the way the unit was displayed. The difference between HP and PS is probably smaller than the difference between HP and BHP, probably rounded to the nearest 10 horsepower, I believe it’s either horsepower or PS or fiscal horsepower (which has nothing at all to do with power). My car is zero CV (fiscal) but produces 66 kW.

The US market 505 might have had slightly different specs, not heavily re-engineered, but the car is still made in France and should follow the MOS for strong ties, not weak ties. The car was also sold in Australia and elsewhere.

Magazines give non SI units because those magazine editors use non SI units in their magazine or in their country. The manufacturers specs are all SI, and because Wikipedia is read worldwide, the MOS should be followed because readers in other countries may or may not use SI, in Southern Africa, Australia and New Zealand they use only SI, examples: [[1]] or [[2]] Avi8tor (talk) 10:20, 3 June 2024 (UTC)

The units used by Peugeot, the manufacturer's specs, are metric hp, and so were the original units in the article. If not, why did you change the output from 110 to 109hp? No reader worldwide would think a French car would be using imperial hp, unless it's specifically referring to the US market model. I think that we should lead with the horsepower, but it's not a hill I am willing to die on. You could even include imperial hp, and you will see that those numbers are present in the table. The US market model has different specs from all other markets, particularly the engines which all have different outputs because they were re-engineered to meet federal emissions regulations.

Cubits are obsolete, horsepower are not - it's as simple as that. You yourself mention that magazines (and non-english WP articles) typically use horsepower; that would not be happening if everyone was SI.

The difference between HP and PS is probably smaller than the difference between HP and BHP, probably rounded to the nearest 10 horsepower, I believe it’s either horsepower or PS or fiscal horsepower There is no difference between HP and BHP, those are both equal to 746W, you are very confused. Metric hp equals 735W. I am not even sure what this sentence is supposed to mean.  Mr.choppers | ✎  19:06, 4 June 2024 (UTC)

Your the one who is confused. Horsepower and brake horsepower are both intended to measure the power of an engine. However, the way in which the figures are calculated is different, and this results in differing numbers. An engine is measured for horsepower with some pieces of the system missing, while brake horsepower is measured with every component in place. As a result, brake horsepower measurements include more frictional losses, which results in a lower figure. The manufacturer is likely to go for the higher number because it looks better. Avi8tor (talk) 11:36, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

But both hp and bhp are defined as 746W. They are different methods of measurement (as in DIN v ECE v SAE v JIS, etc), whereas this discussion is about the units used. You have repeatedly brought in tax horsepower (and have even tried converting tax hp to kilowatt in the past) and other red herrings; please focus on the actual concern. I would still like to know what I believe it’s either horsepower or PS or fiscal horsepower means.  Mr.choppers | ✎  18:43, 5 June 2024 (UTC)

This article originally listed hp not metric hp, only after I included the convert template did you decide to change it to metric hp, which is probably correct, but I'm only interseted in the kilowatt output. With very old vehicles, due to their very low power output, entering only hp can present as imperial horsepower unless it states fiscal horsepower. You could have fixed this error prior to my edit as you were editing the page, but you did not. The main reason for this conversation is because you refuse to follow the manual of style as to which units to display and in what order. Avi8tor (talk) 09:12, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

Mr.choppers I've filed a request for dispute resolution. You should get a notice when it's posted. Avi8tor (talk) 15:37, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

It only stated hp, but that is not an error - note that when I use "hp-metric" in a template, the output reads "hp". In daily speech we do not typically distinguish between the two kinds of horsepower; context is usually sufficient. You may not care about the horsepower figures, but that doesn't make you justified in changing correct info to wrong information. The fact that 110hp converts to 81kW should be enough to determine that this is a metric hp figure. Meanwhile, I did tons of work updating the table to use the precise numbers and correct units (although CV should probably be preserved for Italian cars, but ch doesn't work and PS is a German abbreviation). I do follow the MOS, there just happens to be more to it than merely changing everything to SI. I have quoted the relevant sections of the MOS to you several times and you just act as if they do not exist.

What does this mean: With very old vehicles, due to their very low power output, entering only hp can present as imperial horsepower unless it states fiscal horsepower. What's next, you will change Citroën 2CV to Citroën 1.47kW?