Australian, Wheels, October, 1973
On the face of it, Renault's two new coupes, 15TS and 17TL, are going to have a hard time winning Australian acceptance. For a start they're up against some powerful Japanese opponents led by the Datsun 240K and 240Z, which are cheaper and go harder. And then there's the recently revised Fiat 124 Sport Coupe with the l5OO cc engine, which is likely to be the enthusiast's choice.
It's all a question of money. The Gallic newcomers would be far more competitive if they were a grand cheaper - a base price of $3989 is just too much for the cheaper Car, the 15TS. Admittedly for the money you get a well-equipped, elegantly styled two plus two, with comprehensive instrumentation, good seats, carpeting, a heated rear window but it has only mediocre performance and poor finish for the money. The 17TL is plusher again - it has a console with a clock set into it and starts at $5108. Auto transmission ($3501, electric windows ($100}, radio (around $100}; and cloth upholstery ($50} are options.
In fact, the two coupes are mechanically identical. They're based on the 12's floor pan and suspension, but using the 16TS engine producing 102bhp. There'll be a 17TS version next year with fuel injection and a five-speed gearbox. Although the l5 is the cheaper car, our test crew unanimously preferred its "glassier" styling to the 17's closed in effect, with heavy rear pillars and small louvred windows on either side. Below the waistline, the shapes are identical, both having the rubber tipped bumper surrounds front and rear. The 17 has quad quartz halogen Cibies, while the 15 has the 12's rectangular lights.
For our test we had a fairly new 15 less than 2000 miles old), but our 17 was an "old" pilot car, the first one Renault imported here-the veteran of more than 10,000 hard, hard miles and several teardowns too. The coupe's engine is the hottest, hemi-headed four we've seen for years now in, the 16TS. It's a fairly long stroke unit (bore is 77 mm, stroke, 84 mm) by today's standards, but it revs well and provides power to the high side of the red sector, 6500 rpm (the redline starts at 6000.
On the other hand it will pull smoothly away from about 1400 rpm but a wide throttle opening lower than that will cause a wheeze and a drowned engine. At a bit over 3000 it gets into its stride (that's where it produces maximum torque) and if you stay above that it's quite a lively performer.
We recorded 18.5 second standing quarter mile times consistently and while this is quite good for a 1.6 litre car, it doesn't really do the Renaults justice because they were rather slow off the line. Acceleration between 30 and 80 was pretty brisk and that's just where most passing is done.
Both coupes recorded sensational fuel economy - better than 28 mpg during a test that included high-speed cruising, town driving and acceleration runs. The coupes were not terribly well insulated from engine noise - in fact our first impression was that they were going to be very noisy. Curiously though, the noise level doesn't build up much as the revs rise and anyway it's a rather pleasant sound. There was a boom period on the high side of 4500 in both cars, but round town you'd rarely hear it and on the open road it doesn't bother you.
The 1565 cc engine is mated to the 12's gearbox, suitably modified, but drives through a larger clutch than the 12�s have. The synchro on our newer test car (the 15) was lightning fast, but on the hard-used 17 it was showing signs of age. The gear change action was typical Renault - rubbery - but the throws were short and the gate was well defined, one of the better front wheel drive changes we've tried. The clutch actions in the two cars were entirely different. The 17, which was virtually a prototype, was heavier and had less travel on the pedal than the 16 but I've found it better. Renault says the specifications are identical, so the heaviness was probably a quirk of the 17.
But the pedals clutch and brake were terrible. They are too flat with a long pedal travel so that when you pushed them in your foot moved in and down an entirely different system to the usual. The pedal angle is virtually identical in the 16TS but in the four-door model you sit up higher and the pedal movement is far more natural. The pedals were also too close together and there was always the danger of catching the edge of your size 10 on the pedal you didn't want to touch. And heel and toeing was pretty nearly out of the question. Bad. But the rest of driver's appointments were fine.
The seats, as usual with Renaults, were comfortable and well positioned. Our test 15 had the cloth upholstery {a $50 option) while the 17 had the standard vinyl ones. The cloth was grippier, but we preferred the vinyl ones because they seemed to offer a little more support for the lumbar region. Yet the cloth does give the interior a more luxurious feel. Rear seats were correctly shaped but there was little leg and headroom for adults. The steering wheel angle was just right. The 17 had a 1eather bound wheel (the same diameter as the I5's plastic one) which made a world of difference to quick motoring in warm conditions.
The instruments - a full set of them - were mounted in futuristic binnacles easily seen through the wheel. There was a very detailed array of warning lights identified by typically ingenious Gallic symbols. Wipers, washers, all the lights, turn indicators and horn were actuated by easy to-use stalks. Everything but the washer/wipers was worked by a lever on the right of the steering column.
To clean the screen you used a little control, which sprouted from the dash, within reach of your fingers even when they were on the wheel. There were rocker switches near the instruments for heater fan, heated rear window and (in the 17) on the console for the electric windows. The excellence of the 15~17 control layout showed up during our tests when the cars were used for day to day commuting. Our drivers were quick to feel "at one" with the cars.
On the road you find that the Renaults are unashamedly front wheel drive. Where loads of castor action in any corner and plenty of effort is needed at the wheel to keep the car on line. But at high speed on the open road a Renault coupe is very stable -it's so good that you can use its performance in places where you'd have backed off in a more powerful, conventional car. And the noise level at speed is surprisingly low. There's not much wind turbulence - sealing around the doors is particularly good - though the engine starts to get pretty noisy as you approach the ton. But 9O mph cruising is entirely practical both because of the car's tenacious grip of the road and its quietness.
The overall handling characteristic is understeer in the best front wheel drive tradition We found that the classical technique of powering right through a corner was the only viable one. You needed to set the car up well before the corner, get the lock on and apply the power more or less as you entered it. Entering a corner quickly with power off just brought on ploughing understeer and tyre squeal, which only abated when you fed in the horsepower. A lot of the time the car seemed to be understeering more than it actually was, because the strong self centring action loaded the steering up so much. Once the driver became used to the difference in effort needed when cornering fast and slow, the Renaults became smooth, fast tourers. The flaw in the early setup power-through-cornering technique was that in long bends you couldn�t get much power down early. There were also times in undulating country when I�ve found it couldn't be set up early enough because we couldn't see far enough up the road.
The steering with an ideal 3.5 turns from lock to lock is light in town, (even with the weight of all the mechanicals over the front wheels), but fairly heavy at parking speeds. There was plenty of feel though it was a bit rubbery in the straight ahead position. On dirt the car was a mixture of very good and quite bad. It absorbed most bumps pretty wel1, though there was plenty of noise from underneath. But getting power down was a problem, over corrugations especially. When accelerating, one or other of the wheels would break traction for a moment and the car would "walk" about on the road.
The Renault's ride on both bitumen and dirt gave an insulated, comfortable feeling to the occupants. But we found that you could catch it out on ruts running straight across the road - when it hit one of those the nose would drop and it would bottom at the front - and how! The brakes were very good. Heavier than you'd expect, but strong, progressive and fade free. We experienced a bit of rear wheel lockup on dirt, but this was certainly not a serious problem. The stoppers are disc front, drum rear. They're well up to the job.
Visibility was the only thing which large]y dictated our test crew's preference of the 15. It was much easier to see out of and therefore was safer. Forward vision in both cars was not especially good. They had low rooflines and fairly long noses, which restricted vision quite a lot by, say Holden HQ standards. It was impossible to see the rearward extremities of the car, and rear vision via the central mirror was also poor, not because of the mirror's size, but because the rear window was vertically quite small.
The character of the Renaults appealed to us in lots of Ways. There was Gallic flair in the superb control layout, the styling, and in the beautiful seats. The third door will have to be promoted hugely if Renaults are to "go" in Australia. This is the feature that the opposition, apart from the Datsun 240Z, doesn't have and though the concept hasn't dawned on most Australians yet, it's amazing how many people buy a car for just this sort of feature. The only trouble is that the third door in the coupe doesn't have quite the same practical application as the 16TS's.
For one thing it leaves a large lip over which things must be lugged to get them into the boot. And the rear seats don't fold down to increase the carrying capacity. Looking at it cynically, all you're getting is a super-large boot lid. Renault Coupe buyers will be drivers who like front wheel drive, because that's what these cars are ~ they let you know every mile you drive. Buyers warm to things like the third door the headrests, which REALLY WORK, and the incredible economy of the car.
The styling will also have to play a large part in their decision because this is another area where the Renaults steal a march on the opposition and even the availability of an automatic transmission gives the car an advantage over the Fiat 124, especially with women. But most buyers will no doubt be lovers of French cars ~ that steadfast breed in whose eyes French manufacturers can do no wrong.
They'll pay the high price just to prove their loyalty.
Return to 15/17 Home Page.
15/17
Australian Magazine Review Page