ClioSport.net
Register a free account today to become a member!
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
2005 Impreza WRX STI
money is key factor! both mint cars!
Polo GTi
Quote: Originally posted by Loony on 05 August 2005
Odds on this thread will turn into a mk1 vs mk2 slanging match
Hopefully
2005 Impreza WRX STI
if money no objesct then obiously a 172. however if u wanted a valver and spare cash??? whats your situation?what would u wan the car for?
Vee dub
Well in my opinion, from owning my valver for year now....
The 16v is a fantastic little car, but you will need to spend money on it, as most people know. I dont do track days in mine but I have spent alot of money on it already mainly maintenence etc. But the rewards of keeping it well maintained are WELL WORTH IT.
If you want a newer car, no rust, or 6k service intervals, get a 172.
I know if I had to choose, Id still pick the 8 year old clio.
Tom
Mk2 V6, MK1 Track Sl#g
well i was planning on getting a valver to do engine mods basically (coilovers, cams, big brakes, hopefully TBs, etc), but was thinking of keeping this as a track car when i got something abit newer next year so was gonna keep the valver for a weekend track day toy and car show toy. but then thought of getting a 172 to keep for a year or two bcos its abit newer to treat myself and do little mods such as exhaust, induction kit, lowering etc. bcos i do abit of travelling around and alot of mileage a year (15000 to 19000 a year) so was thinking a 172 for that
tbh the 172 will be more suitible if you are doing big milage. You have to service them less often and being newer and most being lower milage than valvers you wont be getting the cost of replacing worn out or broken bits that you do with a valver or any car 10years or more old for that matter.
2005 Impreza WRX STI
172 then
Mk2 V6, MK1 Track Sl#g
the only thing that puts me off valvers is that i previously owned one and it ended up like this
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/bayliss064/Carpics009.jpg
But, equally, you wont get stung for thousands in depreciation when you come to sell a valver as theyre already as low as theyre going to go really.
172s are still dropping in value and will continue do so for a while yet...
Id get the 172.
I own what people regards as the valvers big brother and a Mk2 and I do loda of miles per year and the mk2 is the better car for milage work.
Id get a cheaper Mk1 172 for £4~4.5k and save th rest towards a Willimas which arnt tat much more and have the upratd 2.0 vaver owners spend a fortune buying and fitting plus have the wider track.
I would get the 172 because if I was to go for a Mk1 Clio, it would be have to be a Williams or a hybrid.
Extra money for a badge and 13bhp isnt really worth it. If youre doing a lot of performance oriented mods it doesnt really matter if you get a normal valver or a Williams. I wouldnt go for a 172 over a valver, and I didnt, and I know people will argue to the end either way theyre inclined so itll just come down to you really. The way I looked at it was valvers are old skool kool, 172s have more power but its just not the same.
Quote: Originally posted by T-Unit on 05 August 2005
Extra money for a badge and 13bhp isnt really worth it. If youre doing a lot of performance oriented mods it doesnt really matter if you get a normal valver or a Williams. I wouldnt go for a 172 over a valver, and I didnt, and I know people will argue to the end either way theyre inclined so itll just come down to you really. The way I looked at it was valvers are old skool kool, 172s have more power but its just not the same.
I dont want to start an argument (but this remark is bound to) but I think the Williams is a much better track car its not just 13hp is a more torque low end engine plus it has the wider track suspension. Plus it has a stronger gearbox.
Anyway if you were buying a valver for performance then the big modification people do stick a 2.0in there its chaper to but th car with the 2.0 already in there.
The Jinx
Obviously Im going to say valver but Ill try and justify it without just saying the 172 is sh*t (which it is
)If youre using it for trackdays then the valver will give you one very important thing which IMO the 172 lacks. Feedback, and tons of it.
My plan was to get a track car next year and didnt know what (106/Saxo, ax were on the list). Having done Ty Croes I can honestly say Ill be getting another valver on the cheap.
1: Depreciation isnt an issue and is cancelled out by the running costs of the valver.
2: They arent hideously unreliable. Mine has had the alternator go and the thermo housing. Everything else is a maintenance issue, and I knowingly paid less for mine than the average market value when I bought it 18months ago, because I knew it hadnt been kept A1. Find a minter and itll be fine.
3: Feedback, as already mentioned, is there by the bucketload. Not just through the wheel but through the noise, your feet, your arse, everything.
4: IMO the car just handles better outright.
5: For a couple of hundred quid you can uprate to a willy chassis effectively which I would do with 172 Cup springs.
6: The arches wont "definitely" rust, if you properly clean the car out and Waxoyl it. Although mines had one done the other is still A1 and thats on a 12yr old car that spent most of its life on the south coast.
7: The noise. Valvers are one of the best sounding 4-pots ever made.
I will openly admit that I do like the mk1 172 and would consider owning one, but if it had to do trackdays then no way.
[Edited by Swervin_Mervin on 8/5/2005 2:48:21 PM]
Remapped derv Golf
Nah! For me a mk1 172 all the way.
For me a valver is too old and isnt as safe as the newer clio. Also the 172 has all the modern stuff like A/C and ABS.
Call me boring but thats my opinion.
Also the 172 is pretty near to that old skool feel for a modern hatch.
Ive just bought a valver.
Ive been and driven enough fwd and indeed rwd cars to realise this car is, certainly for the money and probably even in present "new" company, a cracking little hot hatch.
The feedback is superb and this inspires far more confidence than other "hot" or "warm" hatches Ive driven before.
I think this is worth enough, even if it does not have the outright speed of a 172. That said, Ive yet to drive a 172 anyway!
The Jinx
Quote: Originally posted by Adamf on 05 August 2005
Nah! For me a mk1 172 all the way.
For me a valver is too old and isnt as safe as the newer clio. Also the 172 has all the modern stuff like A/C and ABS.
Call me boring but thats my opinion.
Also the 172 is pretty near to that old skool feel for a modern hatch.
Cage the valver for a couple of hundred and itll be mega safe. AC is for girls and the valver has ABS. Not that Ive ever managed to get mine to engage even though its running DS2500 pads.
xr4x4
7: The noise. Valvers are one of the best sounding 4-pots ever made.
^^ i second that, valvers sound the dogs danglies
2005 Impreza WRX STI
drive a 172 with a decent exhaust on
The Jinx
I have. It was a bit dull.
172 is the safe option...9 times out of ten itll be more reliable and itll be quciker out of the box. However, if money is no object and/or youre going to modify then the valver is the better car...better platform to build on...arguably better looking...cheaper to start with...easier to deal with...can be made as quick as the 172 for less etc etc.
stop being a prick and get a cup!!!
Quote: Originally posted by T-Unit on 05 August 2005
<FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #407db6">Yeah fair comment. I still think with wheel spacers, coil overs and all the engine work hes having done there wouldnt be much in it but then if youve got more to start with youll end up with more. I was just thinking of the money side of things mainly but he says thats no object.
Wheel spacers will come NOWHERE near to replicating the Williams handling. If it was just spacers, Renault could have saved themselves a lot of money developing the wider track.. heh.
Quote: Originally posted by richy on 05 August 2005
can pick up the ITR jdm version, 200bhp with lsd, all usual stuff they have like air con etc and a fantastic car for less then 7k
Please dont tempt me.
Anyay £7k is a lot of a dedicated track day car Ive got a habbit of crashing on track Id not spend that sort of money on a track day car.
Remapped derv Golf
Again mate its just my 2 pence worth. I see a 172 as a better and newer car than a valver. You and others have different views which is fine. Isnt ABS only an option and hard to find?
LY 200
2.0 valvers the best option imo!!!
Has so much more than the standard lump...............More raw than the 172 imo.........Sound good, look good, handle very well and go very well annnnnnd a ready made up one could be yours for around 3k!!!
Id probs go for a 172 if it was my everyday car and i didnt mind looking like a big girl driving it.........lets nt forget the 172s pretty identical to the 1.2, 1.4 and 1.6 sports looks wise!!!
Quote: Originally posted by Bayliss on 05 August 2005
the only thing that puts me off valvers is that i previously owned one and it ended up like this
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y67/bayliss064/Carpics009.jpg
Just as well its a vavle and not a willy
