Clio 172 Cup 'vs' Clio RenaultSport V6 (255)
20 February 2006, 11:13 AM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Clio 172 Cup 'vs' Clio RenaultSport V6 (255)
My mate had a play with one of these on a private stretch of dual carriageway last week. The V6 came flying passed him and i told him i wasnt having any of it and he should have a go! So, he put his foot down and set about reeling it back in! There really was nothing in it, i checked the performance figures and your looking at .5sec 0-60 and 2sec difference 0-100. His cars standard bar full stainless system. I think he held his own pretty well!
Just shows how good the Cup really is, and how the price differance for a V6 isnt really justified!
Just shows how good the Cup really is, and how the price differance for a V6 isnt really justified!
20 February 2006, 11:30 AM
#2
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Chesterfield
Posts: 2,939
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Despite the shell, they are 2 different cars, that offer 2 different driving experiences. The V6 has always been critersized for its pointlessness compared to the Clio Sport, however 2 different types of people tend to buy each of the cars. The V6 is unique and the Clio Sport is not.
20 February 2006, 06:14 PM
#6
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by scoobygav555
The V6 is a track toy, bet there would be a difference out there?!!
But theres no way i'd spend an extra 10k on one
But theres no way i'd spend an extra 10k on one
Trending Topics
20 February 2006, 06:41 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I was in the UK press car of the Mk2 when it did it so I would say no 
Not saying it isnt a great car, because I love the look of it and its got a stonking engine........however and its a big however for me, as a track car It felt like it needing handling with kid gloves. My aggresive driving style would see me collecting armco quickly......The cup would be a quicker easier car for me to drive on track.
Gary
Not saying it isnt a great car, because I love the look of it and its got a stonking engine........however and its a big however for me, as a track car It felt like it needing handling with kid gloves. My aggresive driving style would see me collecting armco quickly......The cup would be a quicker easier car for me to drive on track.
Gary
20 February 2006, 06:41 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 1,764
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Tim-Grove
Thought they sorted that out??
The MK1's were renound for it.
The MK2's were completely different cars to drive. Suspension and handling was drastically improved.
As was said before, you can't compare the V6 with a 182. 2 totally different cars.
20 February 2006, 06:42 PM
#10
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Terzo 333
They did.
The MK1's were renound for it.
The MK2's were completely different cars to drive. Suspension and handling was drastically improved.
As was said before, you can't compare the V6 with a 182. 2 totally different cars.
The MK1's were renound for it.
The MK2's were completely different cars to drive. Suspension and handling was drastically improved.
As was said before, you can't compare the V6 with a 182. 2 totally different cars.
20 February 2006, 07:44 PM
#11
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Just far enough from sunny Liverpool
Posts: 6,963
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having driven both Mk1 and Mk2, the 2 being a great improvement, granted, I still consistently lap Oulton quicker in a Cup.
The Mk1's do feel real scary, great if you have your 'hooligan' head on, but not all that predictable, and lethal for an inexperienced driver in the wet- you have to be 100% switched on all the time.
Basically echo everything GP says^^
The Mk1's do feel real scary, great if you have your 'hooligan' head on, but not all that predictable, and lethal for an inexperienced driver in the wet- you have to be 100% switched on all the time.
Basically echo everything GP says^^
20 February 2006, 08:45 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The mad world of mid-engine RWD!
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You gotta love em!
Well i'm obviously biased but....
Where else can you get mid rear layout, decent NA power, creature comforts, reasonable reliability and affordable servicng?
Yes they are challenging to drive but which mid engined cars aren't?
Yes they were over-priced new.... So buy second hand!
Barring lack of boot space (who gives a **** about that anyway!) its practicle in the UK climate (hard top!).
Plus they are rare as hell and look MENTAL!
Love it!
Peter
Where else can you get mid rear layout, decent NA power, creature comforts, reasonable reliability and affordable servicng?
Yes they are challenging to drive but which mid engined cars aren't?
Yes they were over-priced new.... So buy second hand!
Barring lack of boot space (who gives a **** about that anyway!) its practicle in the UK climate (hard top!).
Plus they are rare as hell and look MENTAL!
Love it!
Peter
20 February 2006, 08:47 PM
#16
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Clio_V6_255
Well i'm obviously biased but....
Where else can you get mid rear layout, decent NA power, creature comforts, reasonable reliability and affordable servicng?
Yes they are challenging to drive but which mid engined cars aren't?
Yes they were over-priced new.... So buy second hand!
Barring lack of boot space (who gives a **** about that anyway!) its practicle in the UK climate (hard top!).
Plus they are rare as hell and look MENTAL!
Love it!
Peter
Where else can you get mid rear layout, decent NA power, creature comforts, reasonable reliability and affordable servicng?
Yes they are challenging to drive but which mid engined cars aren't?
Yes they were over-priced new.... So buy second hand!
Barring lack of boot space (who gives a **** about that anyway!) its practicle in the UK climate (hard top!).
Plus they are rare as hell and look MENTAL!
Love it!
Peter
I loved the sound of the engine ....... I loved the urge ....... just the handling I couldnt get to grips with.
Not for me but a great car for many I should think.
20 February 2006, 09:09 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 247
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by J4CKO
Yeah, but, the normal Cup looks like a normal Clio, the V6 may as well be a supercar for the heads it turns.
21 February 2006, 01:31 PM
#18
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 1,981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by scoobygav555
But theres no way i'd spend an extra 10k on one
21 February 2006, 02:16 PM
#19
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 172/182/Cup/Trophy is as fast/faster than the V6 is always being debated. A lot of what has been reported has either been sensationalised or misinterpreted – The V6 clio is in a totally different league. It is a proper performance car instead of some lightweight shopping trolly with a power to weight ratio helping it punch well above its weight in the hot hatch arena.
I had a bit of fun with a 182 driver a couple of weeks back and totally destroyed it. The problem with the Vee is that you need to understand it (and have confidence in it) to get the best out of it.
There are loads of people on cliosport.net who are convinced they have the better driver's car. In reality, the only way they are going to get past one is if it is parked.
I had a bit of fun with a 182 driver a couple of weeks back and totally destroyed it. The problem with the Vee is that you need to understand it (and have confidence in it) to get the best out of it.
There are loads of people on cliosport.net who are convinced they have the better driver's car. In reality, the only way they are going to get past one is if it is parked.
21 February 2006, 03:57 PM
#21
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 8,425
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fister
The 172/182/Cup/Trophy is as fast/faster than the V6 is always being debated. A lot of what has been reported has either been sensationalised or misinterpreted – The V6 clio is in a totally different league. It is a proper performance car instead of some lightweight shopping trolly with a power to weight ratio helping it punch well above its weight in the hot hatch arena.
I had a bit of fun with a 182 driver a couple of weeks back and totally destroyed it. The problem with the Vee is that you need to understand it (and have confidence in it) to get the best out of it.
There are loads of people on cliosport.net who are convinced they have the better driver's car. In reality, the only way they are going to get past one is if it is parked.
I had a bit of fun with a 182 driver a couple of weeks back and totally destroyed it. The problem with the Vee is that you need to understand it (and have confidence in it) to get the best out of it.
There are loads of people on cliosport.net who are convinced they have the better driver's car. In reality, the only way they are going to get past one is if it is parked.
22 February 2006, 02:15 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
Join Date: May 2005
Location: The mad world of mid-engine RWD!
Posts: 81
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by mg driver
how come the cup was faster round the top gear test track than the v6 then ,stig can drive.
Wet conditions do not suit higher powered rear wheel drive cars. IMO if both cars were timed in the dry, the V6 would pull out a healthy advantage as it could then use its extra power and torque!
Peter
23 February 2006, 04:24 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Whitley Bay
Posts: 1,563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Little off topic here, but I'd love to know! -
Is the engine in the Clio V6 the same as the Nissan 350z but with increased displacement? I know the Z has the renault engine, just wondering!! Anybody???
Is the engine in the Clio V6 the same as the Nissan 350z but with increased displacement? I know the Z has the renault engine, just wondering!! Anybody???
23 February 2006, 05:01 PM
#27
Scooby Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi All.. used to post on here years ago when i had a Scoob..
..!
I now have a CUP.. and can say it's great.. far quicker than a V6.. (Proven many times on a trackday at Brands.).. maybe in a straight line in the dry the V6 may have the edge.. But there's only 10 BHP per ton... LOL.
The CUP has incredible turn in and great levels of grip certianly keeps you on your toes... when on the limit on your favourite lane/s anyway.... and i't just as quick across country as my old Scoob WRX (with full decat, etc...)
BTW.. any old Clang-N-Ballers on here..?!?!
..!I now have a CUP.. and can say it's great.. far quicker than a V6.. (Proven many times on a trackday at Brands.).. maybe in a straight line in the dry the V6 may have the edge.. But there's only 10 BHP per ton... LOL.
The CUP has incredible turn in and great levels of grip certianly keeps you on your toes... when on the limit on your favourite lane/s anyway..
.. and i't just as quick across country as my old Scoob WRX (with full decat, etc...)BTW.. any old Clang-N-Ballers on here..?!?!
23 February 2006, 05:23 PM
#30
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: the sunny dunny
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by nickwrxstiV2
Little off topic here, but I'd love to know! -
Is the engine in the Clio V6 the same as the Nissan 350z but with increased displacement? I know the Z has the renault engine, just wondering!! Anybody???
Is the engine in the Clio V6 the same as the Nissan 350z but with increased displacement? I know the Z has the renault engine, just wondering!! Anybody???
ewan