talizman

iTrader: (1)

Yes.

Clio has more power. More torque. Quicker to 60. Quicker to 100. Higher top end.

kammy

Just buy a Crx vtec

Andy M3

lol -

ok - i give up - what you got now BTW ?

talizman

iTrader: (1)

All my cars in chronological order are-:

1) Citroen AX GT 1990 H reg
2) Citroen Saxo VTR 1998 S reg
3) Citroen Saxo VTS 1997 R reg
4) Subaru Impreza WRX MY96 N reg
5) Renault Clio Williams 1 1993 L reg
6) Citroen Saxo VTS 2001 Y reg
7) Subaru Impreza Turbo 2000 MY00 W reg
8) Renaultsport Clio Cup 172 03 reg
9) Subaru Impreza WRX STi Type UK PPP MY03 (phew)
10) Subaru Impreza RB5 WR Sport MY99 T reg (current)
11) Honda Civic Type R 52 reg (current)

Tomtommunchyman

Can I offer an alternative option which is always seems to get overlooked ?

I've never driven a saxo or any of the other options being discussed in this thread so unfortunately can't compare my suggestion with the others, but i'm sure they're all fine cars in their own way, each to his own.

My suggestion is.......... (No laughing please !)...........................................

The Nissan Almera GTi

No they're good honest ! I have owned one of these and it was a blast !

I'm not sure on exact figures but :
2L 16v Around 150 Bhp (Depends on S1 or S2) & 0-60 8.0 secs
On top of that you'll get such luxuries as air con & ABS
Standard Front & Rear Strut Braces
Nissan Reliability
And a certain amount of exclusivity.

And they are "cheap as chips"

for £3k you should easy get Series1 P/R plate £3.5k should get a Series2 S/T plate.

Think there's a couple for sale on almeraownersclub.com for sale S/T plate 50-60k miles FNSH for around £3.5k although the for sale section seems to be down at the moment.

One word of warning mind the front spoiler / skirt they're made off egg shells, expensive and hard if not impossible to replace.

Just a suggestion.

talizman

iTrader: (1)

/\ /\ /\

Well that'll be a conversation killer then

Andy M3

nice selection of cars, i assume you swapped the 03 so you can have 2 cars as apposed to one, or is the RB5 a better car ???

As for the rest, i am inclined to think you have always been a car nut ?

As for me, i have h=but had some terrible cars in the past. I will list the cars that are better than the ones i am not going to list. I have only been driving 7 years though:

1993 Metro GTI 16v mpi -
1995 Peugeot 306 D-Turbo
2002 Saxo VTR
1989 Audi Quattro Coupe - 2.2 n/a
1986 BMW 325
1987 BMW M3

talizman

iTrader: (1)

I traded the 03 against the RB5 as I bought a house and needed to release some dosh.

6 months later I traded the Clio Cup in for the CTR.

The current toys.....

Jamescsti

my list is much shorter:-
Fiat Seicento Sporting- cheap first car with free insurance
Mondeo TD-company car at same time
Fiesta Zetecs- Sold for
Impreza STi

Andy M3

That RB5 is beutiful - i would have traded a new one in for that - deffo I also have had to buy a house, which isn't all bad, cause i bought 2.5 years ago and i have managed to move again and rent my first house out other wise i would be in a GT2 996 with power pack and 'lowered seat' lol

Diablo

and

and


All suggest to me mate that, no offence, you really don't quite understand the concept of handling - vs - grip and rarely push your cars to their limits and beyond

Impreza's as they come out of the dealerships, are not the best handling cars by a long way. They suffer from excessive understeer (in the dry) and lift off oversteer on the limit.

They have good grip and phenominal traction due to the 4wd. Steering feel? you having a laugh?

I've owned a number of cars over the years with much better steering feel and handling characteristics than a classic scoob, including a 205gti, a Mk2 Escort, an original mini, and best of all an Integra type R.

Having owned a classic scoob (with the geometry properly set) and driven both a Vts saxo and a pug 106gti, I'd say both had better steering and handling than the Scoob (although all are prone to lift off oversteer)

Due to a comparative lack of power it is easier to contain an understeering (non dccd) scoob in the wet than in the dry if driven properly.

And as for your "WTF" at the comment that AWD doesn't count for much when the tarmack is smooth and dry...well, lol, wtf?

That statement was right on. AWD does NOT count for much when the tarmac is smooth and dry, when traction is not an issue.

If you fail to grasp that, then I would suggest that you are not qualified to comment with such apparent conviction to this thread, notwithstanding that you have owned all of the cars in question.

A to B in the dry my Integra was quicker than my scoob. Above 60 mph, it was faster in the wet as well when traction was no longer an issue.

Why? Because it had better steering and handling - even if on paper it was slower 0 to ????.

talizman

iTrader: (1)

I may not have translated my thoughts into words perfectly, but I fully understand the differences between grip and handling.

As for pushing my cars to the limit.....

Perhaps I don't as much as the next person, but what I do do, is drive within MY limits, and not push the car to its limits which are probably above my own.

I understand fully that my Saxo's and especially my Clio Cup had awesome handling, but nowhere near the same grip as the Impreza's but that is to be expected.

In a lot of ways, I preferred chucking the Clio Cup about, and at times, it did handles better than the Impreza, but as a total package, it fell short IMO.

You talk about steering feel....

You want to drive my CTR, then you'll know what vaugue and wooly steering feels like. I personally think the Impreza's steering is well weighted and with the correct geometry setting, turn in is as sharp as any hot hatch.

Notwithstanding, there are obviously many many cars with better steering and handling than the Impreza, but at no point did I claim that the Impreza was the "be all and end all" in these areas.



Any car with front wheel drive, or in the Impreza's case, predominantly front wheel drive (UK cars) will understeer when pushed, thats not exactly rocket science.

Similarily, the cars will oversteer, either without warning or can be induced if you know what you are doing.

The french hatches are reknowned for being some of the worst offenders for snappy lift off oversteer, which for the majority of owners, is an absolute risk.

Whilst you or I may detect the slide, and catch it in time and control it, that majority of people will panic and brake, or steer the wrong way, worsening the oversteer. Certainly this is how my g/f wrote off our VTR on a tight corner.




I have no doubt that the wet does assist in controlling a sliding/understeering/oversteering car, hence why skid pans etc are carried out under the conditions that they are.
My point was, that to induce/experience uncontrollable understeer in an Impreza in the dry, you would have to be pushing it so far beyond its limits in a manner probably best reserved for trackdays.
In my experience, the car can be driven quick enough for the road, whilst not experiencing too much understeer, certainly not a level of understeer that you need to "contain" it.


Again, I have been misinterpreted.
I agree that on bone dry tarmac, a front wheel drive hatch will pull just as quicky out of corners/roundabout etc as a 4WD car, and that the 4WD comes into its own when grip is affected by rain etc.
I took it that the poster was suggesting that AWD on smooth dry tarmac could almost be considered a handicap, which I argued against.

Diablo

Well why didn't you say that the first time around

D

talizman

iTrader: (1)

LOL,

cos I can't type quick and by the time my fingers have caught up, my train of thought has moved on!

gravelexpress

hey - the almera Gti was considered to be honest, along with Sunny GTiR but Im not going for either.

Its probably a VTS as said or Ibiza cupra sport 16v (98/99)

cant find many 16v cupras so the vts gets a test drive first.

talizman

iTrader: (1)

For Seat's try here

gravelexpress

thanks Taliz im registered to that site

IWatkins

Of course, there is the successor to the Saxo, the C2. Get it in GT trim homologation special, manual gearbox, no spare, just foam, no electric mirrors, no air con, no front fogs, no body kit (apart from spoiler) etc.

Build quality is much improved over the Saxo, also has NCAP 4 stars which is amazing for a small car that weighs on the 1000kgs mark.

Super chuckable, handles like a roller skate, reminds me of the Golf Mk1 days etc. Speed sensitive weight on the steering as well gives nice feel. Bounce your head off the windscreen brakes. Great fun.

110bhp standard (although everyone seems to be getting 115bhp dyno'ed), add a full stainless sports CAT manifold and exhaust and sealed induction kit for less than a grand gives ~10-15bhp gain, loads of other tuning possibilities (TBs etc.).

All in all, great fun car and cheap in all aspects. C2 GT Demonstrators with 1k miles on the clock can be had for £8k. In addition the VTS version (125bhp) is due soon, but will be around £11-12k mark.

Cheers

Ian

Mine:


The one I wanted:

R1916v

Don't know if it's been said yet, but finding a 106 gti in same condition and milage for that price is v hard, I know I've been looking!!

106s are going for more cash than equivelent saxos.

gravelexpress

i could not find any 106 Gti`s Ralleye`s ets at anywhere near the price of the Saxo nor the Ibiza

Abdabz

Havin been only a passenger in a VTS and a 106GTI, the feel of quality and handling in the 106 simply felt better to me. Yeah the leather/suede seats stc helped the pug. Anyhoo, Saxo's have been butchered by the max power generation and really shouldnt be driven by anyone other than girls and zit infested burberry wearing teenagers.
The Zetec S is not a bad choice either, less stereotype but also less performance...
For £3k though your likely to have to get something thats been flogged and its unlikely that during your short time owning the car (due to people pointing a laughing ((Only kiddin)) and unreliability) you wont lose much cash...
Oh go on try the VTS and give us a review of it in 6 months time - just dont crash it!!

mw2655

hi,

to help answer the original question...

the vts is quick, reliable and a fun drive, i owned one for a year and a 106 gti before that, no probs with either, thery're more or less the same car, both had lift off oversteer when i went too fast.

i traded mine in for a my00 turbo but i'd have another, well i've a 205 gti as my 2nd car at present...

cheers matt

jimsG60

Hi.. newbie here but might as well throw in some comments.

I had a 2001 VTR - horrible quality car from a build point of view (never lean against the body work as its flimsy as paper, panel gaps, badly glued on trim), the footwell is incredibly small (i'm size 9 and struggled in certain pairs of shoes - quite dangerous actually) but was economical and pretty darn nippy.

From what I read on the Saxo forums whilst I owned it the VTS is a bit more troublesome with various sensor failures, etc being reasonably common - but maybe thats just cause they all get thrashed by their owners or something?

R1916v

Well I test drove a V reg 106 gti yesterday that had 39k on the clock, and I was disappointed.

It had been lowered which didn't help, but just didn't seem to pull as well as the 19. Handling felt ok.

And how close together are those pedals???

It's still for sale if anyoen is interested, it seemed a good price, however I think its had some work done as the passenger rear 3/4 panel was well out of line with the tailgate.

The bloke selling it runs a small subaru selling business from his house, the STi Type R looked awesome.

www.wrx.co.uk

LG John

First things first - I couldn't be assed to read much beyond page 3 but I have a few comments to make.

The 106 GTI and VTS are so close it comes down to personal preference. I raced one in my VTS and unsurprisingly it was dead even!

The handling on my MKII VTS was standard and I only had bumpsteer and geometry done to my MY99 and I assure you the VTS would run rings around it on a nice dry road unless the road is broken to bits with loads of dodgy camber changes, etc. I know scoobys handle much better on 17s with some suspension mods but out the box good luck trying to leave one!

I had the williams argument with a williams driver (craggy for those in the know) a number of years ago and he refused to believe that from 0-100mph only 1-2 metres would seperate them! He bought a VTS as he need cheap performance and I assure you his opinion is quite different now!!

As is happens I'm due a run with a mates VTS next week at Crail and I'm thoroughly concerned about being humbled over the 1/4 mile despite having a V6 and 200hp under my hood!

FWIW my VTS was the most 'fun' car I've owned and its amazing how many people try to blow them away only to be humbled or at least very well contained. Until the cup came out I'd argue a VTS is the best bangs per bucks in the hothatch department so is well worth consideration as a 2nd hand buy

Ayde

iTrader: (6)

Go for the VTS owned an R reg (1998) for 18 months the car was great fun as std but put a full Scorpion de-cat, Green induction kit and lowered front springs and adjusted the rear torsion bars to match front height and it was a very fast good handling little car. It was a couple of years old when we got it and it never let us down. Occasionally had the airbag light come on but a quick jiggle with the wires under the front seats would sort that Having worked on both Saxo's and 106's in a bodyshop the 106 is better built (by this I mean the 106 is held together with screws as opposed to plastic clips like the Saxo) The alarm used to be a pain on the VTS too and you had to immobilise the interior sensors via a switch on the dash otherwise the alarm would constantly be going off (this is a common fault). Not much could get past the VTS and it would pi$$ off other drivers who thought there cars where superior to the little Saxo As for the Max Power thing you tend to find they have VTR's and West Coasts not VTS's

RichH

SB, thanks mate...

I gave up arguing with him. On paper the Williams and VTS are almost identical, same with the Clio 16v, so why can't the VTS be as quick? Who knows. And I know what the bugeyes did when I drove them. But of course I was making that up too, apprantly? I don't care Enjoy whatever car you drive, I know I do... (including my 1275GT Mini Clubman) !!

Rich

Mike123

Autocar tested a Clio 16valve in 1992. Took 24.2 seconds to reach a 100 and 7.4 to 60 Max of 127mph
Saxo VTS took 22.4 seconds to a 100 and 7.7 to 60 Max of 123mph
106 GTi took 23.9 to 100 , 8.2 to 60 and max of 123mph.
As the Clio is a heavier car with a fewe more bhp I would say the difference in performance wouldn't be noticeable really
For info Clio Williams took 20.8 seconds to 100, 60 in 7.7 and 130 max.

Figures in Performance Car are broadly similar

LG John

Mike, I concur with your quoted figures but would add that the autocar test on the VTS was the MKI VTS and its now well known/accepted that the MKII (or at least most of them) produce nearer 130bhp as opposed to 120bhp. It might not sound like much but 10bhp more in a 935kg hatch is useful. Consequently I believe the true 0-100mph for the VTS to be 20s dead. If you don't believe me get a hold of a MK1 and MKII and race them - the MKII will eek away very slowly! My VTS would also exactly match numerous cars that were quoted at 20s to 100mph and it takes the 17-18s machines (172s) to creep away from one and the 15-17s machines (classic, ctr, cup) to start to pull away with a nice degree of comfort.

Not that all this matters anyway because as I've said time and time again most saxo's you'd race in a williams, 172, or whatever will have 50kgs of ICE, 50kgs of blonde in the back, 50kgs of bodykit and running on 17s!! Consequently they have a 0-100mph time of around 27s

When I race the VTS at Crail in my Pug I'll try and get some video footage of it to show the difference or lack off. My car is quoted at 19s 0-100 and given that it hung onto a RB5 from 65-125mph I'm guessing that is conservative so I should have a useful advantage over the Saxo especially above 60mph

Diablo

Agreed wouldn be quicked but no way 20 s dead to 100.

Had a 1.9205gti which was lighter and with a genuine 130 BHP and more torque than the saxo - did 100 in about 21-22 seconds (per tests of the day)