172s are awesome

Ex-User (19928) · Oct 30, 2014

I've been looking at cars for a couple of months now. Initially I was looking at modified MX5s (had one before) for cheap RWD thrills, but the compromise of comfort and practicality is a bit too much to bare in the Mk1 and the Mk2 has never been a favorite of mine.
Since I've considered other hot hatches like an FN2 CTR or Mk5 GTi but both are still FWD and don't offer enough benefit (IMO) to pay the money coming from a 172.
Most recently I've looked at the Mk1 TT. First the V6 DSG but my girlfriend wants a manual as she's just started driving again and wants to get good at 'driving' which I commend, so instead of looking for a Manual V6 I settled for looking at the 1.8T 225. Drove one last night and my word they are nice to look at and sit in, but they are no where near as good at being engaging to drive as the 172 is good at being a decent enough place to sit.

So it's looking more likely that I'll just keep the 172 until I can afford something in the next league, for now the 172 is an awesome all rounder that's pretty hard to beat for the money.

banther · Oct 30, 2014

Yep. I've just got an R53 Cooper S and its a pain in the ass compared to the Clio. Think I'll be going back. They definitely aren't better built than the Clios.

The MX5 is great too but, as you say, its not very practical. Might hang onto it for the summer though. Currently tucked up in the garage!

Goodj · Oct 30, 2014

I did like my 172 when I had it.
I wouldn't gush as hard about it though, its frenchness can be very much the curse of a good car.
As for "engaging drives", the MX5 is superior, vastly. I do wonder why people complain about practicality when for 99.99% of the time there'll only be them in the car. I mean, it's got a boot and a spare seat, what more do you need

Many confuse 0-60 times with fun but, as you've found with the TT's, this is not in any way the case.

banther · Oct 30, 2014

Can even get two golf bags in the boot and a baby seat on the boot rack thanks to the ISOFIX points (one of those may be untrue)

Ex-User (19928) · Oct 30, 2014

I'm still thinking about a cheap turbo'd 1.6 MX5 as a second playtoy car for next year. But it couldn't replace the Clio.

Goodj · Oct 30, 2014

Jeff simply said:
cheap turbo'd 1.6 MX5

Oh dear, we've got a ricer here

MarkCup · Oct 30, 2014

They really are.

I've found myself looking at any 1*2 recently...I'm drawn towards finding an original Trophy as it's the only one I've still yet to experience.

dann2707 · Oct 30, 2014

Out of interest, how come people prefer 172's on here? Or from what i've noticed anyway?

Goodj · Oct 30, 2014

dann2707 said:
Out of interest, how come people prefer 172's on here? Or from what i've noticed anyway?

I do.
Ph.2 at that. The least popular of fast clio, looks the least chavvy.

EDIT - Hmmmm, maybe there's something in that last line

Ex-User (19928) · Oct 30, 2014

dann2707 said:
Out of interest, how come people prefer 172's on here? Or from what i've noticed anyway?

You mean to a 182?
There's not really any advantage over a 172 that I can think of that a 182 has other than being newer/better looking (opinion), although that is enough for some I'd imagine. On the flipside it's compromised in that it doesn't have a spare wheel. They're much of a muchness though.

dann2707 · Oct 30, 2014

Jeff simply said:
You mean to a 182?
There's not really any advantage over a 172 that I can think of that a 182 has other than being newer/better looking (opinion), although that is enough for some I'd imagine. On the flipside it's compromised in that it doesn't have a spare wheel. They're much of a muchness though.

Yeah, sorry! Does the lower power not put people off but then again is there even that much in it in reality?

Goodj · Oct 30, 2014

nah, not by much.
in fairness, a standard 172 in the real world probably isn't much more than 160hp on a good day, 182s maybe 170. Maybe
Of course, there'll be some on here that'll step up and say that they feel each and every one of those horsepowers. Clearly their racing license was lost in the post

Ex-User (19928) · Oct 30, 2014

dann2707 said:
Yeah, sorry! Does the lower power not put people off but then again is there even that much in it in reality?

There is zero difference in performance in reality mate.
It really depends on whether your engine was built on a good day or not that's all. My Ph1 has never failed to reel in 182s when having a play, conversely I'm sure there are 182s out there that have very strong engines and would shrug me off. At 10+ years old it's more about how the engine has aged than whether it was badged 172 or 182 anyway.

JoeMarano · Oct 30, 2014

Im going 172 purely for the immense amount of car you can get for under 2 grand...

Mr Plums · Oct 30, 2014

My 182 is the best car i have owned, practical, cheap, nippy, fun, use as a daily, good on fuel, doesnt look to shabby, pretty reliable(never had a problem in two years).

_Tom · Oct 30, 2014

One of the only think I hate about Clio's is the seating position. Bang for buck they cannot be matched.

I agree if the MK5 GTi is anything like my A3 they couldn't be further from a hot hatch..lol

Ex-User (19928) · Oct 30, 2014

Seating position isn't great but it's not that bad.

The Fatty · Oct 30, 2014

I prefer the 182 because of all the extras + I like the twin exhausts.

Mr Plums · Oct 30, 2014

The Fatty said:
I prefer the 182 because of all the extras + I like the twin exhausts.

I preferred the standard alloys and exhaust over the 172, i also wanted an arctic or bg. I know mondial is close to arctic but i didnt want a cup.

Martin_172 · Oct 30, 2014

MarkCup said:
They really are.

I've found myself looking at any 1*2 recently...I'm drawn towards finding an original Trophy as it's the only one I've still yet to experience.

Do it mark! from reading your comments/opinions and watching your videos online you seem to be very similar to myself, I think you would get on very well with a Trophy, I love mine much more than any of my standard or modified ph1, ph2's, 200 etc.

also driven my mates Fiesta ST at length, which is now Revo stage 1 and think that when looking at the trophy and fiesta side by side and stats you may think they are just an old skool and new skool version of the same concept, in reality I would actually enjoy owning both and wouldn't see it as a bit pointless.

The fiesta is a great day to day car that makes epic pace cross country, its faster than the trophy, it has as much grip as the trophy, I have as much fun in one as I do in the trophy, but every time I get back behind that awkward sized wheel and odd driving position coming from driving the fiesta it still puts a smile on my face, as id say the trophy is definitely more special to drive being rare with its geeky suspension and you soon forget about the lack of torque when your back to using the revs!

Cub. · Oct 30, 2014

It is fair to say I like mine.

JoeMarano · Oct 30, 2014

I just wish I would stop getting pissed about and finally own one!

Jonff · Oct 30, 2014

Cracking little cars and so much car for little money, relatively cheap to run providing you don't end up with a dog. I'll no doubt own another once I've got bored of the Focus. lol

Welsh_Nut · Oct 30, 2014

Goodj said:
nah, not by much.
in fairness, a standard 172 in the real world probably isn't much more than 160hp on a good day, 182s maybe 170. Maybe
Of course, there'll be some on here that'll step up and say that they feel each and every one of those horsepowers. Clearly their racing license was lost in the post

That's mostly down to the 172 only had 167hp@flywheel when brand new and the 182 only had 176hp@flywheel when brand new, So 10 years wear and tear on the engines id be surprised if any 172s std had 160hp now and 182s 170hp and people using rolling roads estimated flywheel hp really does make me laugh as not only are thay guessed but thay also have a hinded bhp gain just to say what it mite run if it was really cold!

182Trophy · Oct 30, 2014

MarkCup said:
They really are.

I've found myself looking at any 1*2 recently...I'm drawn towards finding an original Trophy as it's the only one I've still yet to experience.

I will be selling mine after xmas if your interested.

Daz. · Oct 30, 2014

See the 172 did nothing for me the more I think about it - My Wlliams was truly special and I adore my Megane a billion times more than my 172.

Goodj · Oct 31, 2014

Welsh_Nut said:
That's mostly down to the 172 only had 167hp@flywheel when brand new and the 182 only had 176hp@flywheel when brand new, So 10 years wear and tear on the engines id be surprised if any 172s std had 160hp now and 182s 170hp and people using rolling roads estimated flywheel hp really does make me laugh as not only are thay guessed but thay also have a hinded bhp gain just to say what it mite run if it was really cold!

I'm not entirely sure what you're saying here, but....yes?
Have they discovered punctuation in Wales yet?

Welsh_Nut · Oct 31, 2014

Goodj said:
I'm not entirely sure what you're saying here, but....yes?
Have they discovered punctuation in Wales yet? :wink:

Basically thay have less power than people think thay had from factory and rolling road printouts for flywheel horse power are full of s**t.
Yeap but im totally s**t with it these days Lmfao...

Ray Gin · Oct 31, 2014

I did like my old 182, but I don't think I'd buy one again. If I had to buy a cheap fwd hatchback my money would be going on a VTS/106 GTi.

imprezaworks · Oct 31, 2014

I keep coming back to them, such good value for money. Current one seems to go very well indeed and the fact it doesn't stand me mega money makes me happy. That and the fact it gets used rarely as I have a work (completely boring) car as a daily (fiat stilo jtd). Love doing bits to it and can't wait to get it out on track in December.

JoeMarano · Oct 31, 2014

Just what I got rid of lol
106 is probably better on track but 172's are better all rounders.

imprezaworks · Oct 31, 2014

Was that to me?

Adamm. · Oct 31, 2014

Liam. said:
I did like my old 182, but I don't think I'd buy one again. If I had to buy a cheap fwd hatchback my money would be going on a VTS/106 GTi.

I've considered getting rid for a 106 gti, bit cheaper to maintain etc. Daren't go through with it though as I bet most are ragged to buggery and the boot floors rot like mad.

If someone offered cash and a swap for an S2 I'd struggle to say no though.

MarkCup · Oct 31, 2014

Martin_172 said:
...every time I get back behind that awkward sized wheel and odd driving position coming from driving the fiesta it still puts a smile on my face, as id say the trophy is definitely more special to drive being rare with its geeky suspension and you soon forget about the lack of torque when your back to using the revs!

This is what appeals. The ST is almost too good. Only almost though, it is a hooligan on demand, just a nice refined one.

I kind of miss the character of the lean forward long reach into third gear and the offset steering wheel though LOL

Smiffyboy1990 · Oct 31, 2014

They are simply amazing for the price and bang for buck you'd struggle to do better. But i got bored after a few months and the rattles when I just wanted to drive home and not abuse it on a b-road grew tiresome.

I find my Disastra VXR more fun to drive tbh. Even though the 1*2 is a million times better on paper.

JoeMarano · Oct 31, 2014

I can't wait to drive the 172 when I get it tomorrow. I've kind of not hype it up too much in my head though. The fastest things I've driven recently (that ive owned anyway) are 106 gti and a Twingo rs. So the performance isnt going to be massively different. The extra torque might be nice though

Sargara · Oct 31, 2014

MarkCup said:
This is what appeals. The ST is almost too good. Only almost though, it is a hooligan on demand, just a nice refined one.

I kind of miss the character of the lean forward long reach into third gear and the offset steering wheel though LOL

Sounds like you should buy my Trophy that's for sale *shameless plug*

182Trophy · Oct 31, 2014

Daz. said:
See the 172 did nothing for me the more I think about it - My Wlliams was truly special and I adore my Megane a billion times more than my 172.

I'm the opposite as the meg I took out did nothing for me. Lovely car don't get me wrong, just a bit disappointed with it.

Daz. · Nov 1, 2014

I'll admit the first few times I went out in it I was worried I'd got it wrong but after giving it a pasting I soon changed my mind - sooooo much more confidence in this thing.

DannyR · Nov 1, 2014

Welsh_Nut said:
That's mostly down to the 172 only had 167hp@flywheel when brand new and the 182 only had 176hp@flywheel when brand new, So 10 years wear and tear on the engines id be surprised if any 172s std had 160hp now and 182s 170hp and people using rolling roads estimated flywheel hp really does make me laugh as not only are thay guessed but thay also have a hinded bhp gain just to say what it mite run if it was really cold!

I've never seen one under 100k and serviced well, actually even some of mine that weren't and heavily abused, that has given a s**t reading. They actually get better with age.

My low mileage one 40k was so tight and new after 10 years, then one on 100k was nicely worn in. The engines are bulletproof!

172s are awesome

Similar threads