Sorry mate that was a typo on my part, it was supposed to say "wouldnt be a cars length between them"Originally Posted by Revels
Sorry mate that was a typo on my part, it was supposed to say "wouldnt be a cars length between them"
Oh so you will buy one!! Excellent, you wont regret it, the minute you feel the g-force from all those horses you will be reaching for your cheque book. I'll help you choose one!!!!
PS - have you driven a 197 with the Renault warranty remap at all - a complete different ball game to the 50% out there that do not have the patch installed, massive improvement to lower end torque and therefore 0-60 times. This is what the published 0-60 figs are based on as they were on the very early cars. Graph below.
Rolling roads results are widely acknowledged to be f**k all use for anything but comparisions. Some 197 owners you can take seriously, because you can have a discussion with them. You however, are worse than the average V6 owner.
lol, this is a thread about 0-60 times. You are then going on about around the track times. I have quoted the 0-60 times published by renault and they show the 197 to be the fastest.
I'm happy to discuss the above no problems
Have you driven a 197 with the remap?
True. As you were fan boy.
(Haven't driven a newer 197. Your the only owner I've read of making such grandiose claims of it)
have a look at the thread i started on renaultsport.co.uk's forum, i dont want to put the link in here in case i get slapped, but type in 197 cold start patch. 95% of the owners on that thread (and there are lots) have all reported an improvment in torque and acceleration. Its running to over 22 pages.
I'm not quite the numpty you have me down as.
You can't really bunch the 182 and 197 as carrying a weight deficit over the 172! the 197 is a fair bit heavier, the 182 is hardly different to the 172, only difference is the twin exit exhaust but it loses the spare wheel and wheel well which probably makes it the similar.
Last edited by c__w; 02-02-2009 at 13:39.
In my opinion Clio aren't straight line fast at all, 6 seconds/7seconds, it's really nothing exciting. !72/182/197 are all too close to compare, they are all great cars, enjoy them for what do they best, leave 0-60 times for the school kids to talk about............
They're a quick hot hatch - it's all relative so comparison between similar cars are as valid as something that might make it under 4 seconds.
Quick hot hatch as in a-b but as for acceleration then there is a awful lot of modern day traffic that will keep up in a straight line, all i'm trying to say is that the clio's are awesome little cars but there not about 0-60 times, and the tenths of seconds that separate the 172/182/197 isn't enough to worry about.
i could not give a f**k on my car's 0-60 times.
i like to drive my car properly, not burning out the clutch in a pointless straight line... fun. lol
all rs clio are pretty much the same speed.
chased a couple of 182's, chased 197's, chased 172's
they're all the same unless modified and even then it takes quite a bit to notice
My 172 Cup was noticeably quicker than my 182FF, but then everyone with an RS that went in it used to say it felt particularly healthy.
The only mod was a Ktech stealth and it used to keep up with my mate's standard ITR DC5 to 100mph which seemed impressive.
Difficult to compare now as his DC5 is now putting out a dynoed 260bhp with all his mods and it murders my 182!!
0-60 is a bit irrelevant, all my comparisons are through 2nd 3rd and 4th gears where it matters.
I've not done a GPS timed run, but a handy bit of road near me facilitates occasional legal foolishness, and that sounds about right. Only one gear change which makes a big difference compared to the Willie.
funny u shud say that actually........it was up a hill
up the limit from 6500 and its a whole new ball game tho mate
as said b4. timed at 5.6 in mine, with 7.2 limit......60 in 2nd gear is easily achievable then.
little taster
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/w...-172_70144.htm
hmmmm know what your saying. but there is some enjoyment to be had in beating cars u really shouldnt....
I love the whole convo's comparing the 182 and 197. having had both I know there is a difference, hence I kept the Trophy.
Anyways, here are my results from the rolling road. Was rather annoyed that the BHP didn't gain much, however realising that the Torque had increased bu almost 10ft-lb, I realised the remap and exhuast were deffinately worth it.
But the comparison isn't against "other normal traffic", it's a thread about 0-60 times of Clios! I see what your trying to say but the whether there's other cars out there that are as quick or whether the handling is the key reason to own one isn'trelevant.
tbh I was quite impressed with a 4th gear run of 90-120kmh in my 182 recently - it seems pretty quick, quicker than I was expecting.
Well not really mate, ill use my Phase 1 as an example.
The 182 is 21kg's heavier than the Phase 1, the Phase 1 had a shorter throttle cable and 15" wheels (as opose to the 16" the 182 has)
Not exactly the same but enough to mention
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
