firstly i am an ex renault mechanic, secondly i had a pug 405 do exectly the same thing whilst i was on road test so i no exactly what youre saying. 405,s are known for it, cit bx were known for it . at end of day i no i didnt check the bonnet catch was shut properly, my fault simple as that.
yes i no they were designed as maintenance free but that doesnt mean common sense shouldnt prevail and check it really is shut.
most of the replys on here will be from people who opened the bonnet and failed to check it was shut, if a bonnet opened for no reason at all i would be first to agree it was a catch fault.
I had imagined a sense of loyalty to Renault and now I know. That is fair enough.
But you are being extremely insensitive; what about those people who hadn't had their bonnet up for weeks, if not months and still had a failure? You can't say they had not shut it properly (because it hadn't been opened).
As a mechanic you should know the weaknesses of this particular device and that it sticks unless pushed manually when not perfectly aligned. And can you explain to me how YOU check that the safety catch has returned into the engaged position? It is not visible and it is not reachable either.
BTW, I found a Scenic that also had sticky return on the safety; I don't know what year it was but it had access through the grill and was visibly stuck in the disengaged position.
I too had a 405 for many years and did nearly 200k miles in it. I never had the bonnet fly open of its own accord; but you're saying yours did and infer that it is a common problem with that model and others. I also had a BX14 for some years and had no problems with that either. So, should I be flaming you because your experience does not tally with mine? I don't think so.
The fact of the matter is that Watchdog has had thousands of complaints about THE CLIO and no other car despite the claims of Renault and VOSA.
As a mechanic, are you happy with the idea that a government agency that is costing the taxpayer millions of £s annually, can turn round and say that it doesn't do its own testing and assessments when the reason for its existence is precisely that?
Why would Renault admit to such a lapsus when they know that the particular model range is on its way out through natural process of age and scrappage? If they had called in the vehicles at risk when this first came out, it would have cost millions and millions; Now, five years later, many cars have been scrapped or destroyed (possibly by a flying bonnet) so their cost of a recall would be much less. Would they have done this and taken this attitude in America? I think the answer is a resounding NO and I suspect you already know why.
It is worth noting also that Renault has been criticised for this problem in countries other than UK.
It seems to me that Renault, being in the megabuck class with major holdings in top insurance companies, has no fear of being sued by an insurer that is more than likely part of its portfolio of holdings and investments. If the insurer pays for the repairs, the cost is eventually recouped through the insured's loss of No Claims Discounts over a period of years.
This is Macchiavelli stuff as is the cost-cutting that constantly goes on at design stage. Every dollar saved is multiplied by the number of cars they hope to sell. How many millions of Clio cars have been sold so far?