my dad has one of these and its soo powerful. I have a golf gti mk2 16v and even tho he has 33 bhp more its feels like about 100 more. The 0 - 60 is like 6.5 on the mk1 172. Point is what will i have to do engine wise to get a similar result as i would be very happy with that kind of power. cheers mike
2L 6A/9A conversion with KR cams and a rolling road tune will see your car feeling as quick as the clio. Can be done on the cheap if you're doing it all yourself. Is almost a direct swap, very easy. Joe
the thing with the clio is its low down grunt.. it feels like and 8v low down and then like a v-tec up top, i was a sales executive 4 renault and left last year they were great fun cars i had one of them and the later one 2 drove the v6 (which is pants) u gotta love the shift light as standard aswell..
Don't know much about the Clio but I bet it is light compared with a VW giving a much higher power to weight ratio. Along with the mods to give more torque and power you could try losing some weight (the car I mean, not you personally !) ie electric windows, central locking, ICE, missus ! There was a thread on here about saving weight a couple of weeks ago.........
A new Clio 182 is 1060Kg Kerb Weight. I'd say a Mk2 16v weighs about the same as Clio 172. Joe Edited by: Joe_G
No way a Clio weighs the same as a Mk2. A VR6 Golf is around 1400kg so a 1.8 has to be more than the Clio 172 at 1035kg with 172bhp Also try holding a clio when the back end steps out....not easy. Got the scars to prove it!
Mk2 Small bumper 3dr 16v golf has a kerb weight of 960Kg. Tubs 16v with 2.0 16v engine weighed in at 1040Kg I think with a full tank of fuel and a few bits and bobs in. Thats a big bumper model tho with the bigger 256mm brakes and power steering etc. I'd say the Mk2 golf would way the same or less than a new clio for sure. Joe
OK. But the fact remains if you can shed weight you can increase your power to weight ratio and at least narrow the performance gap to a Clio.
Yeah, a mate from work has a cup 172. They are quick but not drastically quicker than my 16v ( honest! )
It's no good comparing engine specs and sizes to deduce weight. You've gotta bear in mind the clio has loads of crumple zones and extra structural parts which have to be put in these days so it doesn't get slated by NCAP. Having a clio that weighs 750kg but gets only a single ncap star would be suicide for Renault.
yeah those 172 cups are very fast. monza 16v, r u having a laugh, your standard 1.8 16v is no match for a cups 2.0 172bhp.
totally agree...though i've only driven the proper clio cup race car, and a 1.6 16v...but both pulled well at low revs, amazingly well for a 16v. nah...with the road going cars its p*ss easy...just keep your boot hard on the throttle. beutiful handling car. race car versions aren't so easy though...they're very very twitchy.
As I understand it there is no 'cup' as there was with the 172 i.e lighter weight & no lardy toys, ABS etc, but on the 182 you can get a cup spec chassis for 200 or 300 on top of 182 price & it includes dif springs wheels & I think tyres. Surely the only one to go for really...
Tha car I had before my mk2 16V was a clio Mk1 172, i say it was alot faster (cracking car), athough mine is a standard 16V with 182000 on the clock got to get it to stealth me thinks. But bear in mind that after owning a clio 172 for 2 years, the money you lose you can buy a cracking 16V, that's what I did, lost 3500 in total in 2 and half years! ouch!!! just save the money you would have lost and mod your 16V
