Just seen this month's car magazine where they tested the Peugeot 206 180 GTi and Honda Civic Type R.

Surprisingly, they rate the Pug higher as the Civic's suspension is too at-the-limit for UK roads.

Their conclusion was that if you have a car with supple suspension it will give nothing away to a car with 15% more power on UK roads. (Not counting tracks!)

I have to agree.

it is all down to driver preference.. if the suspension is not supple enough the car will skip and lose adhesion... note supple doenst equate directly to "stiff" or soft its more about the ability to cope with the given surface.. personally i would puy the CTR cos the 206 is a dog inside... having drive 4 or 5 of them...

sorry forgot to add i prefer the car set too stiff.. others (ian) prefer a little more compliance.. but he prefers bumpy stuff and i prefer flat stuff..

hence difference in std setup of 4x4 and vRS

i find that the RS works best set stiff. the nose washes wide if the damping is too soft.. where as the tail moves when the nose is set firmer..

umm, agreed with paul - depends what you like and the roads you enjoy most.

"Supple" is a difficult one to pin down - needs to be stiff enough not to feel unwieldy, but soft enough not to skitter and lose grip.

I wouldn't pick the Peugeot either.

I think that where most BMW's score is on the quality of their damping - so you get a decent ride but good handling on most road surfaces. I always thought that my first Legacy Turbo (95) had the balance about right as well in terms of composure and resistance to surface changes.

As roads seem to be deteriorating more and more, I reckon that the trend will start going back the other way to compliance and suppleness. The fully adjustable route seems to be the way forward ?