bob r

iTrader: (46)

davyboy

But you'd need to spend that again on brakes to make it stop.

john banks

A set of used £700 AP 4 pots did my car with more than double stock power, and I sold some good P1 suspension for just over £300 recently that also did fine on that car and is now on a car with 550 BHP and doing quite nicely.

A friend exchanged his used Subaru 4 pots for new AP 6 pot 330mm kit for £1000.

Gearbox might be an issue with all the torque, but the 03- gearboxes seem to be holding their third gears well with up to 400 BHP.

Edit to say that I think Subaru 4 pots are just as good as the brakes on my 7000 mile E46 M3 with fresh looking discs and pads. Not the best comparison, but there you go.

davyboy

I find the M3 brakes very odd...they were, at best, crap on a std M3, quite why they didn't change them for the CSL is beyond me.

I do wonder (coming at the angle I am coming from ) if you spent 2-3k on mods on the WRX (engine and brakes), and sent it off around Donington how much quicker than a std clio it would be.

I bet a Clio would still lap faster with a set of R rated rubber for £500.

I did enjoy my time with the WRX but I realised the money it needs spending on it, including purchasing the thing - it will never be the track toy (or part tiem track day toy) that I wanted.

john banks

WRXs have moved on a bit since MY01 though to be fair. The engines seem crisper, and now have VVT and and extra half litre. The suspension has gradually been improved. The front brake calipers themselves are quite good if you get a floating disc/bell setup.

I've not had the pleasure of a Clio Trophy, but have you been in a 300+ Scooby on good tyres with coilovers and AP 6 pots? At Knockhill with a good driver the only thing that was faster on a track day was a track prepped GT3 RS and even then he was on the grass a lot. We're including Exiges, Clios, Elises, Skylines, Nobles, BMW M cars here. You can't compare the glacial jelly that is a stock MY01 WRX to a sorted Scooby. Likewise, I can't compare the drivers of Clios I've had even holding me up through the bends at Knockhill with a driver as experienced on track as yourself.

davyboy

Yep...........with the best tyres available, Michelin Pilot Sport Cups..............it was fun (if you include cluncking AST suspension). It would still not make me buy another one though, even the spec C RA is too heavy.

I am getting a bit off topic here but for me the whole experience of driving is "how the drive made you feel."

Now, if you have ever been a passenger in a 964 RS you 'll know what I am talking about. On paper most Subaru's kick their ***...but on track it is a completely different story...and most of that is down to weight and brakes. I'd even take one over a GT3.

If some of this is not clear, than I have to admit, the Proper French imported 1664 is taking effect

john banks

Are you seeing the French Lessers dancing around the bottles yet? Or was that another advert or dream ?

Agree on the feel of a drive, depends on what floats your boat. My present likes are brutal accel/braking, cornering on rails at painful speeds. I'm just a g-force junkie and miss the finesse that a lot like.

TheJesus

that's not a WRX though mate, it's a WRX with £1200 of mods, PLUS a remap by Andy F... which from people's word on here is the best remap money can buy for these cars... to be fair it's going to murder the Clio, but then it is modded 4x4 Turbo vs FWD standard N/A... cam the Clio, do some inlet work, 220+bhp... may be slightly fairer. anyway, about my challenge, your local, so do you have a std WRX? If so fancy a friendly comparison?

slagmagnet69

Street racing - you guys should be ashamed

scoobyboy1

iTrader: (16)

You right there, The scooby is the sort of car, that you cant help yourself but to spend money on to make it better, Wish sometimes I could get a car and be done with it, instead of spending **** loads of money on it.

Still its faster then a Clio sport

paulg1979

iTrader: (1)

My 182 clio felt faster than my current WRX Bugeye!! and more fun!! Midrange power was easily quicker than my Scooby

scoobyboy1

iTrader: (16)

Which is quicker a Clio 182 or a Civic Type R, Ive been in a Civic Type R and didn’t think it was all that quick, but ive never been in a Clio 182, but would like to know how the two would compare.

scoobyboy1

iTrader: (16)

My old Pug 106 GTi felt quicker then my scoob, but in reality I know it is'nt, I think these little hothatches feel quicker as there lower to the floor.

bob r

iTrader: (46)

marvelous idea, any body else fancy it,? we could make it like a gumball event or our own little santapod, outstanding idea we could meet with the rest of the boys at mcdonalds carpark. ha ha get a grip mate my names not JAMES DEAN. OH AND IF I WAS DAFT ENOUGH TO ACCEPT (AN ONLY ONE OUTCOME CHALLENGE )ID TURN UP IN THE WIFES SAXO AND STILL WUP YA CLIO

Tim-Grove

Buuccc buccc bucccc!!! chicken

bob r

iTrader: (46)

ride this beast and the clio may stand a chance.

rexabusa

ok, evo mag - the knowledge- these times have been independently recorded- impreza wrx 221bhp- 0-100mph=15.7secs
clio172 0-100=18.9
clio182 0-100=17.5
to say there is nothing beetween them to 100 , come on stop dreaming.
more like nothing in it beetween 206gti180- cooper s works - civic type r

pj748r

Posted these figures a couple of pages back but the anti scoob brigade wouldn't have it!I also found the original Evo mag from which they were taken('03).It was taken from the group test with the MY03 WRX,R32,Alfa,Rs Focus,Audi S3.The WRX set its time in the wet,along with a couple of the others.(the R32 won the test,WRX 2nd)
I don't think that the Wrx is the 'ultimate' compared to other cars,but for people to slag it off as slow,is,frankly pathetic.
They are both great cars,but the Clio just doesn't do anything for me.Having had Renaults in the past,i thought they were unreliable,not very comfortable,dealer network ****e.
I can make comparisons,as a friend has got a 172.After having a go of my '02 Astra Sri Turbo(pre WRX),he got a bit of a shock at how quick that was,and the Scoob would leave the Astra for dead!

sgcooby

I brought up these results ages ago on this thread but the clio owners refute them. Fair enough its only one mags opinions but i havent seen anything else thats states different to this but i dont think we want to go down that road again. Someone else stated that an earlier edition of EVO had about 18 secs for the bugeye from 0-100 but i havent seen evidence of these figures but if it is true there does seem a strangely large difference for only a few BHP more but who knows. Think we need more evidence to say for sure. A few vids of heads to heads would be good but then again in these cases a lot of it is down to the driver anyway.

Rabid

Sprint figures are pretty meaningless in my opinion. More interesting are the Autocar track times round Curborough, with the Clio being very slightly faster (0.2 second) presumably with the same driver and same road conditions.
My take on this is that a Clio Trophy/Cup would be beaten hands down by a similar cost PPP WRX given an average driver on real roads.
What the figures do show is that a light car with reasonable power is by far the better proposition on track. I'd imagine the Clio didn't need a new set of brakes after a few laps either......

Still take a WRX over a Clio for use in the real world of marginal weather conditions and B road blasts back home in the evening.

mg driver

those evo figures are only one set of figures from the loads of different ones out there ,,they only tested one car to come up with those figures,the figures i have posted twice showing the clios to be fastest are the results of loads of each car being tested up the strip,,how can one result from evo be more accurate than multiple tests and research by someone else whos totally unbiased.

sgcooby

I agree that one magazine's results dont mean everything and as someone else just posted, the clio being 0.2 secs quicker on a lap of a track does seem feasible but how can you say that EVO mag are biased. The way they rave on about the clio quite a lot i would say they favour the clio and would be more likely to be biased towards it. There are figures that you have posted that tell a different story, which is fair enough, but for the same reason you cant say that they are correct and the magazines results are wrong. Its the same argument for both sides.

TheJesus

Scooby meets might be a Mac D's, this one wont be pal.

You like to talk the Scooby's chances up, yet when a perfectly reasonable offer of a friendly comparison is made you have to attempt to ridicule it as childish, chavvy or whatever. Thing is though, you are still here argueing the toss, so to me this sounds more like not wanting to get shown up by a 11 year old 2.0 N/A FWD car... how about put your money where your mouth is? as I said, your local to me so it wouldn't really be a problem of finding somewhere, there's a perfect private road nearby, we could use that then you can post up how I still pulled past you from a standing start and completely left you for dead on the rolling one.

Anyway, don't try and trivialise it, just say "sorry mate, I don't feel like being shown up by a Clio and concede that your Euro shed is infact a quicker straight line car than my heavy arsed Jap crap... who's only chance is in the twisties whilst in a heavy downpour". Then you can go buy a classic and wake up

sgcooby

Anyone see the best of 5th gear last night? CTR beat clio 182 round track. Dont want to start ought but first saabs and now civics!!!!

davyboy

So CTRs are faster than Scoobs too then!

mg driver

Which scoobs ,bug or blob or both!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

thats odd though cause ive seen 182 and ctr on track results and clio was quickest comfortably,,,guess it shows that different drivers and different tracks will get different results.

sgcooby

The fact that it was the same driver in both cars on 5th gear would indicate that any differences in lap times are down to the car. Two cars racing each other at the same time could have massively different results as one driver could be substantially better than the other therefore the only way a fair comparison can be made is for one drive to do their best times in both cars. A race between cars can not be conclusive as to which car is faster. Its a pity 5th gear or top gear hasn't lapped a WRX yet just for comparison.

Diablo

Why not, everything else is

davyboy

I don't think Subaru will lend them a car, for fear of shame.....

Floyd

iTrader: (9)

Why not see how a million year old standard 944 on road tyres compares with a standard bug eye I'd like to see that

F