Do the new MK3 clios feel better made than the Mk2's

[alex-avfc]

f**k sake! For the third time i was questioning your motives for flatly dismissing the fact that the RS 197 (mk 3 Clio if you need this simplifying abit further) is no better put together than a run of the mill mk 3 Clio! Nothing to do with a mk 2! I had already given my opinion on build for build and had come to conclusion that everything but the paint was an improvement on the mk 2 RS!

Even if we go on what Roy stated is different (mk3 RS/standard car) it still contributes to the build of the cars! Build gos alot further than the shell and whats inside imo!

Nice original come back by the way though. lol

Slow clap for you...well done for going out your way making to make such a minimal point.

The point I was making has been twice explained by Roy, yes mechanically they might be better the interior is put together exactly the same.

And that was no 'comeback' as this isnt a playground slanging match, just you have made a few daft comments including one in one of my threads which has given me that impression of you..

Anyway you can stop making a fool of yourself now

 

[JayR]

Haha, I have no idea what your on about with regards to slanging matches and daft comments made in here and a thread of your own as to my knowledge I only asked whether you were abit thick in this very thread as you couldn't grasp a simple question which was put to you three times in the end!

Anyway whatever you silly little man, you can now f**k off to passionchav.com if you like.

 

[Jamie]

I haven't owned or been in a mk3 Clio unfortunatley. However, many, many people report better build so can't all be wrong.

 

[Munson]

They're all sheds anyway IIRC.

 

[alex-avfc]

Haha, I have no idea what your on about with regards to slanging matches and daft comments made in here and a thread of your own as to my knowledge I only asked whether you were abit thick in this very thread as you couldn't grasp a simple question which was put to you three times in the end!

Anyway whatever you silly little man, you can now f**k off to passionchav.com if you like.

Comments like that; thankyou for proving my point.

Thats twice you've had to result to insults now too...poor show

Oh and no thanks I'll just carry on winding up people like yourself on here (even though the my original comment was perfectly valid)

Cheers now.

 

[JCC]

My mum's 1.4 MK3 feels a lot better than my 1.2 did/172 does. Biggest difference is in the gear change, nice and tight in the MK3 compared to feeling like you're stirring soup in the MK2s.

Her car has only done 12k in the 3 years she's had it though so it may just not have done enough miles to break yet.

 

[Marv-C]

They're all sheds anyway IIRC.

You would say that now have gone and bought a FORD = Fix Or Repair Daily

 

[Munson]

Incorrect. I am on record as calling all Clios sheds long before I sold mine. In fact I refer to my Focus as a shed in RL. Now, get back in your zimmer frame, Grandad

 

[JayR]

Comments like that; thankyou for proving my point.

Thats twice you've had to result to insults now too...poor show

Oh and no thanks I'll just carry on winding up people like yourself on here (even though the my original comment was perfectly valid)

Cheers now.

:boring:

Back to build quality.

 

[Marv-C]

Incorrect. I am on record as calling all Clios sheds long before I sold mine. In fact I refer to my Focus as a shed in RL. Now, get back in your zimmer frame, Grandad

Who said that, come closer sonny :dead:

 

[Martin_172]

we had a 55 plate 1.2 16v expression mk3, after selling it at 95k/2 years it didnt have one rattle, was still put together perfectly, still felt brand new and tight to drive. engine was making an extremely loud whine that renault had it in for 5 times and were un able to cure, it snapped a timing belt at 60k miles/ 1.5 years too!!!

 

[Gorms]

No experience of build of the Mk2s but i have had my 200 for over 15 months now and its been pretty good. Didnt have any rattles for the first year but im just starting to notice one or two. Mainly from the dash windows and Racaros. The panel gaps and the issue i have had with my front bumper is a little annoying and it annoys me more when people say "its a Renault what did you expect". I expected to get £15k worth of car with good build. Surely it cant be hard to build a solid car these days and if it isnt then corners have been cut.

Paul

 

[Cliotoby]

Paint job is another thing. pretty piss poor IMO. I hope to f**k i become successful enough not to have to drive around in a clio by the time im 30. Or any renault for that matter.

 

[mat-nos]

ill let you know in a couple of years...

they feel alot more solid than a mk2 but i guess thats down to extra weight and ncap improvement more than actual material quality....

 

[Gorms]

Paint job is another thing. pretty piss poor IMO. I hope to f**k i become successful enough not to have to drive around in a clio by the time im 30. Or any renault for that matter.

Oh my! 5 months to sort my life out or one massive fail on my behalf.

I think you must be the king (ibrench is your queen) of stupid coments on here

Paul

 

[Cliotoby]

Oh god not you again. lol.

 

[Gorms]

hahah

Paul

 

[pritchard182]

iv owned a 182 and now owna r27 f1 and i can say honestly that the 197 is way way beter handling and is alot easier to drive i didnt realise how dated the 182 was till baught the 197

 

[Alastair.]

mk3 more refined, but steering is light.

mk3 paint jobs are piss poor.

 

[alanc1000]

roffle at the results. only 2 of the "no" voters have got a mk3 from what i can make out.

The mk3 is a definite improvement, yes there are still niggles but anyone who says its not an improvement over the mk2 is talking tosh

 

[Daniel]

Mk3 is a massive leap in improvement.

But theres room for improvement imo.

 

[Curtis!]

Just feels like there is so much more air and space in MK3's, seem all round more civilised. I'd much rather be in one than an MK2 on a long journey!

 

[sideways danny]

from the point of view of working on them, they're no better or worse put together really. Things like arch liners are better, but more awkward to work around. Some bits of the engines are easier to access, then you find something stupid somewhere else. Generally liking the non-sport mk3's quite a bit tbh

 

[Leeshez]

The Mk3s which i have borrowed seem to be better built than my 182. I think it is like people said it is a new car, where my 182 is nearly 6 years old.

 

[theduck]

Agree to a point leeshez, but I think even the older mk3s still feel better made than any mk2 I have ever been in.

 

[Martin_172]

ph2s appear to be improved over ph1's too!! or atleast in GT / RS Spec

 

[Harpham]

To me, my 200 certainly seems to be better build quality than the 172 was. Just the fact you can throw it into corners at stupid speeds and that when you do over 70, it doesnt feel like it's going to fall apart.
I was scared to give my 172 any hard revs as the engine would have probably fell to bits or something.

 

[Dan]

I tried out the 200 cup and it was good and felt as if it was built well compared to my 182 but it's also lost it feeling or urgency and the hooliganism I like the RS Clios for

I think the SC'd streamline 200 maybe the best all round hot hatch??

 

[homerjay]

I think the my mk3 200 is worlds away from my mk2 182.

And my mk2 only had a few hundred miles on it. My mk3 has 12k

 

[The Chubby Pirate]

Car buyings a lottery, new or used. Some will last forever, some will break constantly.

Whether the Mk3's are better built i have no idea, but this thread > http://www.cliosport.net/forum/show...lt-debacle...-(A-really-long-read!)&highlight= , shows just how unforgiving car ownership can be.