LG John

Autocar, April 30, 2003 - page 56, No.4. Need I say more

Please also note the time round track and then tell me you'll leave one in the scooby through the twisties

Carlos The Jackel

It actually won the test in Evo back in '99 I think SB.

[Edited by Carlos The Jackel - 4/30/2003 9:55:51 PM]

Rich D

iTrader: (12)

LOL

I am very impressed that the VTS and it's near twin the 106 GTi have got such good lap times!!!

Soooo close to the Clio Cup and with only 120bhp each.

Loved my 106 GTi and maybe now people will understand why...

Rich D

iTrader: (12)

Here are the times >>>

MooseRacer

They also mentioned how twitchy it was, and that it would have been scary in the wet

The Saxo is a good car, but it's no all time great (imho of course)

carl

No Subaru in the test though

If a Saxo VTS is so great, why do you own a Scoob, Kenny?

LG John

Nah, its not scary in the wet..............its FUN with a capital F by the way

Rich, told you the VTS was faster And yes I'll argue about 0.31 of a second all night long

I'm actually suprised at the performance the VTS/106 put in as well. It just goes to show how well they handle because a cup would be getting a useful advantage in the straights. I still maintain that on sweeping a/b class roads and in the dry the VTS/GTI would run rings around a scooby. Its the lack of understeer that does the trick IMO - the front just won't budge!!!!

MooseRacer

The test was for best drivers car upto 15k, they also tested an STi (26k) and it posted a time 1 second quicker than the CTR (if I remember correctly)

Edit: and they slated it saying it may be quicker, but was nowhere near as much fun!

[Edited by MooseRacer - 4/30/2003 10:51:09 PM]

MooseRacer

The 106 is still a better drive than the Saxo

Rich D

iTrader: (12)

"Rich, told you the VTS was faster And yes I'll argue about 0.31 of a second all night long"


Fair play, but we both know they are near as damn it the same car anyway...

I reckon it's due to the wheel/tyre size difference, as the 106 is still on 14's wheras the VTS runs 15's and I know for a fact that when I had my 106 and I went for 15's (exact same size as VTS) it handled better.

Anyway, not that 0.31secs is a huge difference anyway!

LG John

6 and two 3's if you ask me! Where for me there would be no contest is the fact that the cars are so similar but the VTS is so bleeding cheap! You could buy one and have enough money left for a conolly (sp?) retrim that would put your half-leather efforts to shame

[Edited by Saxo Boy - 4/30/2003 11:10:49 PM]

Rich D

iTrader: (12)

"The 106 is still a better drive than the Saxo"

Damn straight!

We got leather too... :P

LG John

Rich, see above - I pre-emptively shot down your leather comment

Agreed

Rich D

iTrader: (12)

LOL

Rich D

iTrader: (12)

Shame they didn't run a 306 Rallye though, as when CCC magazine did the Rallye vs CTR around Avon Park, the Rallye was quicker!

Not only that, but it was 1.6 secs faster!!!

LG John

The thing is, I bet if you put a 1.9 205 GTI on the same track it would do just as well as the VTS/Cup/GTI/etc - sure we have new toys, better plastics, etc but the real world performance of the hatches doesn't seem to have improved very much in the last 20-25 years

Rich D

iTrader: (12)

Yeah, the 205 was and still is a weapon!

LG John

1.6s - ****!!!

Dang, I'm really in the mood to talk hot-hatch evolution all night but I'm a polling officer tommorrow and have to be up at 5:30 and work till 10:30 at night Best go to bed

MooseRacer

You're not wrong SB, I expect a 1.9 205 would do just as you say.

Hot hatches have been media lead into being big, bloated overweight cars over the last 15 years

Now the very same media is lamenting the lack of decent drivers cars amongst the current crop!

Big Col

what track was it?

MooseRacer

It was at Rockingham I think (but haven#t got it here so not sure)

Many Humbug Returns

The clio cup goes some way to address the big and bloated criticism - stripped out with no abs/air/thinner glass etc, it comes in at just over 1000kg. But thats still about 100kg over the pug gti weight probably due to side impact strength regs etc.

dingy

Had a few races on "private" roads with saxo's in my crx, to be honest allways thought they were slow as.......still do

Dream Weaver

Rich

Ask my sister about her VTS and my Rover 216

I was behind her on the bypass in Fence, going toward the Thatch and she decided to drop it down a few gears and "give me a surprise".

Her face was a picture when I kept up with her from 2nd to 5th all the way down the bypass in my 115bhp Rover

She was gutted when we stopped.

In the right hands and all that though, the Saxo would win

Diablo

Yeah, but the PPP Sti was running 1.25s with ease, was it not.

Some 2 and a bit seconds a lap faster than the Saxo/106.

Still, not a bad showing for the wee cars

Could have told you at the start the CTR would have been the quickest

D

Rich D

iTrader: (12)

"Rich

Ask my sister about her VTS and my Rover 216

I was behind her on the bypass in Fence, going toward the Thatch and she decided to drop it down a few gears and "give me a surprise".

Her face was a picture when I kept up with her from 2nd to 5th all the way down the bypass in my 115bhp Rover

She was gutted when we stopped.

In the right hands and all that though, the Saxo would win"


LOL

I can remember her mentioning that actually...


But, she is a girl and can't drive!

(joke)

kamikaze

suprised the 300bhp subaru was only 1 sec quicker around the track than the civic

LG John

The track has some useful straights so there is no question that a 300bhp scooby would have found its extra time there

The saxo has to be driven right. It doesn't have much torque so if you get caught out with the slightest error you are toast. I mean this in the nicest possible way but most (NOT all) girls wouldn't be able to extract all the performance from it.

As an example: As many of you know I used to work with a guy that had a 172 and we'd regularly play on the bypass on the way home (conditions permitting). Regularly I'd remain practically glued to his rear whilst he'd eek out a few feet here and there. However, once we were waiting to pass a lorry and I couldn't decide between 2nd and 3rd gears. Holding 2nd was p1ssing me off because of the high revs so I put it into 3rd. The traffic cleared and we floored it but I was 'just' outside the powerband. Accordingly I got well and truly thrashed (numerous car lengths). Had the 172 made the same slight gearing error it wouldn't have matter quite as much as the big 2.0 just hauls it back into the power band.

I admit that several times I got caught with my pants down by oil burners, turbo's and big capacity cars that the VTS could have matched or beaten. When you ring her neck out though..........

ianc

"The saxo (VTS) has to be driven right. It doesn't have much torque"

..which is why the VTR was always a nicer drive.



(note: I didn't say quicker, just more fun )


[Edited by ianc - 5/2/2003 12:36:44 PM]