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.
Better straight line speed?
- Thread starter danh90
- Start date
1.8T is such a boring engine and sounds like a washing machine.
Trafic 140dci
Danny i'm not doubting the power of your car, but this ^^^^^^ all this ^^^^^ those races i was in no power band at 2.5k my clio was useless, we were both on the same surface at that airfield when we done a standing start you had no issuues flooring it on the rolling start i can't answer for you backing off on the standing start race, you were up for it when we sat on the line???
SQ5
I can't even see the video of the race, I backed off as my start was horrendous.
But that what I was trying to say, less power low down and your going to start a lot better from a standing start, where as actual useable power when rolling, forced induction is much better than ITB's.
Once rolling its easy to get power down and wouldn't spin up.
Trafic 140dci
Swings and round abouts Danny, i didn't back off when i knew i was gonna get my a*se kicked 
But you did when you should of won anyway with all that power... getting power down is down to the driver...
I'm by no means saying ITB's better, my point is, those video's do my car no justice for how powerful it actually was.
But you did when you should of won anyway with all that power... getting power down is down to the driver...I'm by no means saying ITB's better, my point is, those video's do my car no justice for how powerful it actually was.
Few kg difference in your cars too lol.
Vimeo is being gay, i'm going out but the video will be on my profile soon. If anyone watches it, skip to the end for the little drag lol.
Vimeo is being gay, i'm going out but the video will be on my profile soon. If anyone watches it, skip to the end for the little drag lol.
Trafic 140dci
You had the R888's on and i had A048's was damp too, i remember as you were moaning about them
Skip to roughly 2minutes in this one,
[video=vimeo;53957514]https://vimeo.com/53957514[/video]
[video=vimeo;53957514]https://vimeo.com/53957514[/video]
SQ5
That noise
Sam, this is about straight line speed out of a corner on track, take your grip talk elsewhere
That noise
Sam, this is about straight line speed out of a corner on track, take your grip talk elsewhere
Meh man up and carry more speed
Turbo is he way to go for straight line pace in a clio imo. Most of the S'charged cars we see are crap.grip and a turbo Aren't mutually exclusive.
Lots of people just whack a turbo on a fairly standard car but it doesn't have to be like that, the seat leon single make series cars for example have epic corner speeds and a turbo.
SQ5
Meh man up and carry more speed
Exactly why? It's equal to E46 M3 up to 155 all the way, I wouldn't call that crap.
Ph1 T
That's awesome
I was referring to instillation and parts more than anything. Certainly can't fault them for pace. Dont get me wrong I'm not slating s'charged clios I'd just advise Turbo.
So does a KTM X-bow GT4 and the turbo made it awesome on the rolling starts, keep it on boost and you could do a row of the grid every time. I'm a big fan of VAG turbo engines.
I dont think the VAG turbo engine is any better than an F4R turbo engine TBH, other than the gearbox options!
The F4R internal geometry is FAR better suited to turbo use than to N/A use, done well they really do work superbly as a turbo motor but as an N/A engine it suffers from a lack of valve area, the bore/stroke ratio is unsuitable for high rpm as the piston speeds are so high, this is then exaggerated by the poor rod angles caused by the low rod ratio, and then you have the fact that the rockers are prone to snap at high rpm, its just a bad starting point to build a proper N/A engine, even moderate power like 250bhp is a very expensive place to be, which for a 2.0 engine is pathetic.
Bodies and cams for gauins of 30-40 bhp to get to about 210 or so is ok I guess for a few K, but where do you go then? Its a MASSIVE increase in spending to get the next 30-40bhp from there on in.
Engine dynamics do a kit for 230bhp , unsure the exact price
IIRC the oil tank has to be in a different position.
Clio 172
Seriously? The BAM lump isn't any better? There are way more high power audi and vw's in the tuning world than Clio's due to the tunability of the lump and its reliability. 300bhp is reached fairly easily and I know people running over 400bhp+ on them. :nono::nono:
That's just because more people are into spending money on vw's and because they are more common in places like America where there is a good tuning supply base.
And also cause the f4r isnt turbo in the clio which are the most popular renault for trackday people etc.
the management is rubbish too.
So you have a lot of work done to get you to the same point as you can get more easily on the vag lump as vw have done some of those bits for you.
Core engine though is fine for turbo use.
And also cause the f4r isnt turbo in the clio which are the most popular renault for trackday people etc.
the management is rubbish too.
So you have a lot of work done to get you to the same point as you can get more easily on the vag lump as vw have done some of those bits for you.
Core engine though is fine for turbo use.
Clio 172
That's the point I was making earlier. But there are also some very fast ABF turbo'd vag engines. Lets be honest they make good engines so my original statement that a 1.8T MKII (for example) would make a decent alternative to putting a £3000 turbo'd F4R engine in a Clio is a valid statement. Just to get the cleared up.
A mk2 golf turbo or similar is certainly cheaper to build.
i don't dislike vw's we're building a v8 4wd corrado for my mate at the moment and I've mapped plenty of the 1.8t engines in mk2 golfs etc.
but I still prefer the clio personally, you should have a go in my turbo sometime and see what you think. I reckon you might be surprised. At the moment you are saying you wouldn't like it but have you ever been in one to try?
the 20vt is a very tunable lump, has a few weak spots, Rods and valves. But thats it really. And due to this, they are quite cheap.
The other advantage is the 20vt is over in america. American's seem to push the boundries alot more than over here.
The other advantage is the 20vt is over in america. American's seem to push the boundries alot more than over here.
Well, basically.. They're handy for almost every manufacturer bar the french lol
Clio 172
I'd look at the Dutch if you want to see 1.8T tuning.
I think one of the main things here, is if the OP is going to enjoy the power delivery of the Turbo. You should try and drive one.
Simply put, I dislike turbo power (my VX included). Making swift progress is easy, but for me it's not exciting or enjoyable. The only thing that makes it exhilarating is the number on the speedo.
Overtaking is effortless, literally... 4th gear wait for a gap, and you can pass a line of 10 slow moving cars in one swift movement. There is no clinging on to gears, no planning needed, no wringing the car of everything it's got.
Also, last weekend I had the pleasure of passengering in a 450bhp 996 turbo, and whilst I needed new pants afterwards, the power in 3rd through to 5th felt almost identical regardless of speed. I understand the benefit of cheap power, but personally I just love the way NA delivers.
I've not come in here to p*ss on the forced induction bonfire. I am partial to a cheeky SCer due to the more linear nature of the power... But just wanted to give the topic another angle. If you're spending all that money, try before you buy!
Simply put, I dislike turbo power (my VX included). Making swift progress is easy, but for me it's not exciting or enjoyable. The only thing that makes it exhilarating is the number on the speedo.
Overtaking is effortless, literally... 4th gear wait for a gap, and you can pass a line of 10 slow moving cars in one swift movement. There is no clinging on to gears, no planning needed, no wringing the car of everything it's got.
Also, last weekend I had the pleasure of passengering in a 450bhp 996 turbo, and whilst I needed new pants afterwards, the power in 3rd through to 5th felt almost identical regardless of speed. I understand the benefit of cheap power, but personally I just love the way NA delivers.
I've not come in here to p*ss on the forced induction bonfire. I am partial to a cheeky SCer due to the more linear nature of the power... But just wanted to give the topic another angle. If you're spending all that money, try before you buy!
big boost cup
Not driven anything with a proper turbo in yet. But with the little rotrex bolted on it seems to drive just like a N/A albeit with a bigger engine. turbo is the way to go for power without a doubt (im looking into it now) I cant see there being a problem having a S/C track car when mine had the quaife fitted it would of been a very capable car in the right hands
Ph1 T
Just found this on eBay while browsing through what do people think
http://item.mobileweb.ebay.co.uk/vi...877697fffadcfa?itemId=200849350277&cmd=VIDESC
http://item.mobileweb.ebay.co.uk/vi...877697fffadcfa?itemId=200849350277&cmd=VIDESC
big boost cup
might have a punt at that
imprezaworks
ClioSport Club Member
Mk5 Golf GTI :)
What I can never understand with adverts like that is when people say it just needs this that and the other to finish it off, do it then lol.
They're still behind places like integrated engineering and APR IMO.
Similar threads
