clio 172 cup
 

What every1's opinions on these???? The cup version or std 172?

nice car's if their in the write forum;):p

Thats why i'm asking on a Subaru forum for a unbiased opinion. You would'nt say Scoobies are rubbish...would you?? I beleive this is the "correct" forum.

While we may not say Scoobs are rubbish, we may well consider all other cars to be so!! :D

There has been some discussion on these in the past. Concensus seemed to be that the cup is a competent car and would keep up with a scoob in a straight line once rolling over 50mph or so.

Keep up with a Scoob thats surprising!!!

My in my unbiased opinion ;) I think they`re great lol. Seriously tho mine has minimal mods (usual exaust decat chip and filter) and it managed a 14.1 @ 97 mph so it is pretty quick and also managed a 5.8 0-60 as well so off the mark they can shift too. Had a few tests and with a between 250 and 270 bhp classic it is pretty well matched from 50 to 115/120 (when I change to 5th then the difference becomes more obvious) Build quality isn`t brilliant (nothing fallen off but a few rattles) but thats not what the car is about..I paid £10650 unregistered with 12 months tax and am still smiling in it now!

approx 185bhp (157 atw) with 160 ft/lb in a car that weighs ~1011kg ain`t too shabby

Chris

Brilliant fun, handling and turn in is fantastic.

BTG laps of the ring in 8.40s in a completely standard car.

...and just to ruffle a few feathers, faster than a new age once rolling.

However, the quality of the materials used isn't the best....but for most people it's a 10k car, so what do you expect. Loads has been said before, so do a search.

Dave

Slower than a new age to 60

Faster than a new age to 100

So, alot quicker once rolling!!! :)



Now, I have this can of worms but I need an opener.....

These are the figures we have to hand, but I'd bet as soon as the CLio was in 2nd gear it woulf be accelerating faster.

It's fair that the following is so:

WRX is quicker from 0 up to about 15

From 15 upto 1XX mph the Clio.

had a slightly modded 172 for 2 yrs. great fun and quick, not in same league as my scooby, wud never look back, not even a glance( only to see a clio cup in my rear view mirror.)

I assume you have a classic then. I have no doubt they are faster than a Cup.

A STD cup :)

Chris

Airfix interiors, nuf said

Great car for the money. I would advise you to try one and make your own mind up.

Gary

:lol:

I would go for a later 172 or 182 which has all the ESP and Traction stuff as standard.

They are well loaded little cars and I am getting my wife one once the new shape is etablished.

I had one for a year from new and it was great fun. You need to be careful in the wet though as they dont have ABS. Also you will never be able to get any traction in the wet. I managed a 14.97@90mph(ish) at york dragway and it was unmodified.

I would probably go for a 182 with cup pack and have the suede seats and climate control.

Worst bit for me was the depreciation - I lost a packet in the first year!!!

But nowhere near as much as you would on a scoob

28-30mpg even when pushed very hard

One more thing - Some of them, including mine, suffered from a rattle/knocking when travelling slowly round a left bend - Renault said some of them did this and they did not know why so be aware - I would avoid these.

Funny you say that, my Mk1 172 made weird rumbling, knocking noises from the front when turning slowly (only heard it when going slow - did it at all dpeed). The wheels sounded like they were gonna fall off. lol. I hated that car, had it 3 weeks - heap of dirt.

However - having seen, and experienced the new Cup, it is a totally different kettle of fish.

Ace motors.

Hmm.

I think you're kinda mssing the point of these cars.

http://sheknows.com/graphics/emoticons/popcorn.gif

I am lucky in that I currently own a MY03 STI with a 'few' mods, a bog standard full fat 182 c/w cup packs & a 1.9GTi. They are all great cars & the 182 does indeed hustle WRX's along, roundabouts in MK are fun as are the straights between them :thumb: It does 30+ mpg, does not rattle & has all the toys.

Simon

i had a mk1 172 for a year and was great! very capable cars. the cup is supposidly quicker so ...even better! as said tho, they do not have abs and all the other luxuries! depreciation is a bummer too. all 172s have dropped loads in the last 6 months!! i have driven 2 bug eye wrx's recently and the clio felt quicker. however, once modified, it would be nippy ;-)

I have to say I agree with senior, I mean after all with Subaru leading the way in dash and interior build quality :nono: not!! Lets face it Subaru probably forgot all about the interior, they were that busy squeezing the last possible amount of engineering excellence out of the engine and running gear and then thought oh bugger we need a dash and interior for this road rocket now.

The clio may not have the best build quality but they go and stick and in 182 or cup guise are about so much more than the airfix interior IMHO.

Paul

Example number 1 being a damn sight quicker than new age WRX's. in a straight line, and on track.

Bwa ha ha ha!

;)

i know 3 people who had cups, all 3 had them in the dealer regulary for warranty claims, I believe they are an attractive prospect (cheap power), but get one with a warranty or you'll be crying at the bills. I'm talking engine mounts snapping, shockers failing, cracked manifold, ecu mountings snapping, warning lights flashing for no reason, this is besides many rattles and squeaks. hhhmmm ?