Subaru WRX v Clio Sport
03 July 2008, 08:02 PM
#1
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Newport, South Wales
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Subaru WRX v Clio Sport
I was having an arguement the other day saying that a WRX would be quicker than a clio sport 2.0 16v. A few people agreed that in a straight line the scooby would be quicker but if you get into some bends etc the clio would out do the subaru. does anyone have an opinion on this and would I be right in thinking that the scooby would be quicker?
Last edited by davmcc75; 03 July 2008 at 08:04 PM.
03 July 2008, 08:09 PM
#3
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Newport, South Wales
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03 July 2008, 08:34 PM
#5
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Spec C - 12.5 @ 110(340/350)
Posts: 2,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends on what Clio Sport we're talking about though, the 172 Cup will give your car a very hard time when up and going. Lightly mod the Cup and it does low 14's on the 1/4 terminaling at 100mph, so hardly shy. Again in the twisty's it will depend, the 172 Cup is the great in the bends the 182 Trophy is supposed to be great too.
03 July 2008, 08:47 PM
#7
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Waltham Cross
Posts: 209
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to have a full phat Clio 182 and would say the clio handled the nuts in comparison with my scooby and round the track, would give definate run for its money. However, the clios have no grunt top end and looses its puff quiet quickly. Speed wise, the scooby would kill a clio ;0)
Trending Topics
03 July 2008, 08:51 PM
#8
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Spec C - 12.5 @ 110(340/350)
Posts: 2,314
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I used to have a full phat Clio 182 and would say the clio handled the nuts in comparison with my scooby and round the track, would give definate run for its money. However, the clios have no grunt top end and looses its puff quiet quickly. Speed wise, the scooby would kill a clio ;0)
03 July 2008, 08:59 PM
#9
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Newport, South Wales
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So this would be a close one by the sounds of it, and probably come down to the driver rather than the car. But its mad how we spend so much running our scoobs when a clio would give most a run for the money.
03 July 2008, 09:10 PM
#13
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,070
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
03 July 2008, 09:10 PM
#14
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: support open source mapping software
Posts: 384
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know the Renault Clio 3.0 v6 smokes alot of cars. 255 BHP i think?
Not sure how it would do against a STi.
Not sure how it would do against a STi.
Last edited by SqeekyMclean; 03 July 2008 at 09:12 PM.
03 July 2008, 09:12 PM
#15
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North East
Posts: 2,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
People who want fast Imprezas and only have a budget for a WRX rarely leave it standard. In fact not many Imprezas are standard really lol
03 July 2008, 09:21 PM
#17
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
See what you mean, but you are comparing top spec Clios against a (sorry WRX owners) a sub-spec Impreza. If you are going to make comparisons then do like for like - top of the range against top of the range. Otherwise it is as pointless as Clarksons STI v FQ360 the other night.
People who want fast Imprezas and only have a budget for a WRX rarely leave it standard. In fact not many Imprezas are standard really lol
People who want fast Imprezas and only have a budget for a WRX rarely leave it standard. In fact not many Imprezas are standard really lol
what about price,running costs etc?
sti 25k
clio cup 15k
you can't really compare them like for like.the clios a budget hot hatch
03 July 2008, 09:23 PM
#18
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Newport, South Wales
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
in response to mikkel the WRX i currently have is the 265 BHP version which I was told was one of the higher specs. As I know they also produced the 225 BHP WRX. I know the WRX is not quite as high as the STI but with the running costs etc I could not afford the insurance aswell. As for the Clio it was originally the standard 2.0 16v version i was reffering to, but I still would have thought the Subaru would have been quicker than the cup versions due the 4WD etc in the subaru.
03 July 2008, 09:24 PM
#19
My pal in croatia has the new clio cup, and we had a play, mines 320 bhp type r, and i can tell you a standard wrx better watch out, now dont get me wrong i had him all the way but they are to be respected in the hands of a competent driver they are a hell of a car, and also in the wet it has the advantage of traction control so would still give a wrx a hard time, although i did find it a little intrusive and switched it off
03 July 2008, 09:34 PM
#20
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North East
Posts: 2,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The clio is a very light car compared to the Impreza isn't it? So as standard there's never going to be lot in it.
The allure of the Impreza has always been how strong it's engine is and how it can handle and put down a lot of power when modified.
Hot hatches have caught up to Imprezas an awful lot in the last 5 years to be fair.
As to the point about not comparing top of the range to top of the range based on price... why do we compare STIs to M3s and Evos then? It's a budget saloon compared to them.
The allure of the Impreza has always been how strong it's engine is and how it can handle and put down a lot of power when modified.
Hot hatches have caught up to Imprezas an awful lot in the last 5 years to be fair.
As to the point about not comparing top of the range to top of the range based on price... why do we compare STIs to M3s and Evos then? It's a budget saloon compared to them.
03 July 2008, 09:58 PM
#22
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 712
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The clio is a very light car compared to the Impreza isn't it? So as standard there's never going to be lot in it.
The allure of the Impreza has always been how strong it's engine is and how it can handle and put down a lot of power when modified.
Hot hatches have caught up to Imprezas an awful lot in the last 5 years to be fair.
As to the point about not comparing top of the range to top of the range based on price... why do we compare STIs to M3s and Evos then?
The allure of the Impreza has always been how strong it's engine is and how it can handle and put down a lot of power when modified.
Hot hatches have caught up to Imprezas an awful lot in the last 5 years to be fair.
As to the point about not comparing top of the range to top of the range based on price... why do we compare STIs to M3s and Evos then?
but like you say things have moved on somewhat.there's some very fast focus st's and gti golfs knocking about these days.just before i sold my last scoob myself and a friend"st focus" attended a rally in the rep of ireland.on good clear straight roads there was nothing in the two but it was only untill we reached the b roads where the scoob showed its worth.
we met a guy in a s3 audi who knew the best view points so we followed him,seemed keen pace for my motor but when we parked up my mate in the ford said" **** me! you trying to kill me"....thats where you see the worth in a scoob,very quick car on the twistys but watch out for the hot hatches on the main roads.
now my wee ra eats the focus everywhere,only cost me 4k as well!...up too about 110mph anyway
Last edited by bpm1588; 03 July 2008 at 10:01 PM. Reason: ?
03 July 2008, 10:29 PM
#23
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Nr Grimsby
Posts: 2,641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've owned both and have to say the clio is the better handeling car and has sooo much better brakes.
On a B road the scoob would have an advantage on the straights but in the corners it would be beat fact as the clio can brake later and corner faster.
I've been heads up with a UK turbo, well it was an embarrasment the clio walked away from it. lol.
On a B road the scoob would have an advantage on the straights but in the corners it would be beat fact as the clio can brake later and corner faster.
I've been heads up with a UK turbo, well it was an embarrasment the clio walked away from it. lol.
03 July 2008, 10:42 PM
#24
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North East
Posts: 2,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've owned both and have to say the clio is the better handeling car and has sooo much better brakes.
On a B road the scoob would have an advantage on the straights but in the corners it would be beat fact as the clio can brake later and corner faster.
I've been heads up with a UK turbo, well it was an embarrasment the clio walked away from it. lol.
On a B road the scoob would have an advantage on the straights but in the corners it would be beat fact as the clio can brake later and corner faster.
I've been heads up with a UK turbo, well it was an embarrasment the clio walked away from it. lol.
This is the problem when comparing Imprezas to anything as well as people don't distinguish between old and new. Both have their positives and negatives.
03 July 2008, 10:58 PM
#25
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Nr Grimsby
Posts: 2,641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I take it you are talking about a classic? Handling has come on a long way in the last 10 years on the Impreza and all cars. You just have to look at hot hatches for evidence of that
This is the problem when comparing Imprezas to anything as well as people don't distinguish between old and new. Both have their positives and negatives.
This is the problem when comparing Imprezas to anything as well as people don't distinguish between old and new. Both have their positives and negatives.
As a true head to head i'd love to do Cadwell park in my old clio, and see how close i'd get to the scoobs 1.54, I reckon it would be close.
03 July 2008, 11:05 PM
#26
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: North East
Posts: 2,281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I love classics, and have driven a classic STi (lovely motor), but some owners need a reality check.
There's no doubting you can mod a classic to be a quicker car than the new models of course. It takes less power to make a quick classic but you need to invest in the handling set up.
03 July 2008, 11:12 PM
#27
Scooby Regular
iTrader: (6)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Nr Grimsby
Posts: 2,641
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Straight line, both just hitting the limiter in every gear!
The truth is regradless of age of car its all down to *****, you've either got em or not.
I still feel the Clio is a better balanced car out the box, the scoob is woolly be it a 95 or an 05 compared, but you cant fight the weight around the corners.
The truth is regradless of age of car its all down to *****, you've either got em or not.
I still feel the Clio is a better balanced car out the box, the scoob is woolly be it a 95 or an 05 compared, but you cant fight the weight around the corners.
03 July 2008, 11:27 PM
#29
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: chelmsford essex
Posts: 691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Straight line, both just hitting the limiter in every gear!
The truth is regradless of age of car its all down to *****, you've either got em or not.
I still feel the Clio is a better balanced car out the box, the scoob is woolly be it a 95 or an 05 compared, but you cant fight the weight around the corners.
The truth is regradless of age of car its all down to *****, you've either got em or not.
I still feel the Clio is a better balanced car out the box, the scoob is woolly be it a 95 or an 05 compared, but you cant fight the weight around the corners.