EVO cooper s v's 197 test.

[fizzy_drink]

Yup... I drove the 197. Very nice car, but NO way does it fill the 182 gap.

It's just SO fat!

It's less fuel efficient than the Meggy 225 on paper... and you ask: How is that possible? Gearing.

Despite the gearing, it's still not quite there in terms of absoulte power.


"Warm Hatch" perhaps?

 

[Munson]

Not wishing to flog a dead horse (even though I know I am) The simple fact is that almost everyone who's driven one, both on here and people I know, get out saying it's slow.

That's the perception that people have after driving it, if they've come from another Renaultsport. Whichever way you cut and slice the stats and figures, that is the reality. Speed isn't everything, but I think 99% of all upgrading RS Clio drivers at least want the sensation, if not the actual figures.

I love the 197, I'd have bought one months ago if it didn't feel so damn gutless. I think there are a LOT of 172/182 owners out there thinking the exact same thing, and that's a lot of money that could have been in Renaults piggy bank. I'm not moaning about it, as I have a personal choice what I buy, but it seems a general statement of fact that it just doesn't feel quick. I hope the inevitable Cup/Trophy does something to keep Renualtsport at the top of their game. I mean that from a sales perspective, because if the 197 doesn't sell well, it's not going to do our brand name any good at all, and that can't be good for development funds from the bean counters etc. etc.

It is a fanatastic car, but the facts are that it will likely lose sales to the likes of the Corsa VXR based on straight line pace, and that's a bad thing IMO. Lets hope the guys in Dieppe are ripping out 30 airbags as I type

 

[Ian_182]

It will be so shameful when you've just picked up your nearly full spec 197 and paid 17-18k for it and a £2500 pug 106GTI pulls past.

ian

 

[Rich]

As posted after I drove it, if I did not already have a/or have driven a 182, I think I would have put a deposit down after my test drive. But as Roy says getting owners to upgrade from one for Renualt is going to be hard as the car stands now.

I jumped back into my car, yes the interior looked dated, but as I drove home on the same roads I had just used the 197, the thoughts of upgrading went further out the window.

For me the 197 gearbox (not ratios) and extra leg room, seating postion and interior being a nicer place to be, where impressive, but this was soon outweighed by the horrible light feeling (182 felt like it had no PAS leaving the dealers carpark) and the lack of go, and funless drive. The 197 felt too grown up - but very composed.

 

[jonathon555]

Not wishing to flog a dead horse (even though I know I am) The simple fact is that almost everyone who's driven one, both on here and people I know, get out saying it's slow.

That's the perception that people have after driving it, if they've come from another Renaultsport. Whichever way you cut and slice the stats and figures, that is the reality. Speed isn't everything, but I think 99% of all upgrading RS Clio drivers at least want the sensation, if not the actual figures.

I love the 197, I'd have bought one months ago if it didn't feel so damn gutless. I think there are a LOT of 172/182 owners out there thinking the exact same thing, and that's a lot of money that could have been in Renaults piggy bank. I'm not moaning about it, as I have a personal choice what I buy, but it seems a general statement of fact that it just doesn't feel quick. I hope the inevitable Cup/Trophy does something to keep Renualtsport at the top of their game. I mean that from a sales perspective, because if the 197 doesn't sell well, it's not going to do our brand name any good at all, and that can't be good for development funds from the bean counters etc. etc.

It is a fanatastic car, but the facts are that it will likely lose sales to the likes of the Corsa VXR based on straight line pace, and that's a bad thing IMO. Lets hope the guys in Dieppe are ripping out 30 airbags as I type

Well said !

Renault would deffo get my money again even if the car fell to bits, along as it made you feel alive when you drove it. It just doesn't when will the get this sorted ?

It looks good, the interior is good, but the driving experience is s**t & THAT IS JUST NOT GOOD ENOUGH TO GET ME HAND OVER 18 GRAND.

I REALLY HOPE THE HAVE NOT DROPPED A SUBARU SIZED BOLLOCK (REMEBER THE BUGEYE) WITH THIS ONE !

 

[Jeremy Townsend]

Sadly all new cars are heavier. None are going to be as light as the 172 or 182.

The 197 is 1240kg, the 207 GTi 150 is 1356kg, Ibiza Cupra 1248kg.

 

[speedynz]

You're quite right Roy, the reality is that the figures don't add up. 194bhp in a hatch of this weight (1275kgs) vs the Civic typeR (1204kgs) shouldn't show the disparity that they do in terms of performance figures.

The Honda annhialates the 197 and it shouldn't be the case. Renault even claim more torque than Honda do (by a not insignificant 11lbft).

I detect a faint whiff of poetic licence with Renaults claims. How can you explain the disapointing figures otherwise.

As I said at the start, the figures just don't add up.

The CTR is 200hp and 1204kg. The Clio is 197hp and 1240kg

Independent tested weight of the 197 is 1275kgs and although I have heard that Renault has reverted to quoting 'BHP' instead of 'PS' nobody has confirmed this. Thus my quoted figure of 194 bhp stands open to correction.

The performance point also still stands that given the very similar quoted power/torque/weight figures of both of these cars the 197 performs (both figuratively and subjectively) very poorly.

It's a shame.

 

[Rich]

Sadly all new cars are heavier. None are going to be as light as the 172 or 182.

The 197 is 1240kg, the 207 GTi 150 is 1356kg, Ibiza Cupra 1248kg.

Come on Jeremy we want as light as a 205 GTi or Williams

 

[MarkM]

Sadly all new cars are heavier. None are going to be as light as the 172 or 182.

The 197 is 1240kg, the 207 GTi 150 is 1356kg, Ibiza Cupra 1248kg.

All the more reason to stick a turbo engine in it rather then stick with NA?

 

[Jeremy Townsend]

The 197 figure is PS. All Renault's power outputs are are in PS, as are Honda's and virtually all other manufacturers. The figure of 194 would be the imperial BHP figure. On the same basis, the CTR is 200PS or HP and therefore 197BHP.

 

[Jeremy Townsend]

Sadly all new cars are heavier. None are going to be as light as the 172 or 182.

The 197 is 1240kg, the 207 GTi 150 is 1356kg, Ibiza Cupra 1248kg.

Come on Jeremy we want as light as a 205 GTi or Williams

It would be great, but those days have sadly gone.

 

[Rich]

Come on Jeremy we want as light as a 205 GTi or Williams

It would be great, but those days have sadly gone.

I know

 

[jonathon555]

Come on Jeremy we want as light as a 205 GTi or Williams

It would be great, but those days have sadly gone.

Its sad that Two of my friends who also had 182's both went to order the 197 & after a test drive didn't. One bought a focus ST3 & the other kept his 182. I just hope RS does not see this type of buying behaviour all over the country as this cars potential sales could suffer.

It needs a turbo & quick !

 

[Jeremy Townsend]

Interesting. The Focus ST has a very similar power to weight ratio as the 197. Focus 1392kg 162hp/tonne v the 197 1240kg 159hp/tonne

 

[Englebert]

The only real way of having a faster 197 is copying the Mini Cooper S GP theme.

I can't see Renault spending money on getting more power out of the engine, so it has to be weight. I am guessing there will be a Trophy edition with no rear bench, less sound proofing, the Cup-esque wheels and general poverty spec.

Shedding 100kg will give 175bhp/ton, a shade over a 182 Cup.

 

[Ally]

Q: what's the weight of a Megane 225?

I'm guessing it won't be a million miles more than the 197. It's a shame that the 197 has got bigger but - as Jeremy says - all new cars are getting bigger. And that demand's come largely (but not entirely) from consumers - more toys, more space, etc. Obviously the generic/everyday Clio models are going to be far more important to Renault in terms of sales: can you imagine if they'd made the new clio the same size as the previous model? They'd they'd lose sales to every other manufacturer who's following the trend and making their cars bigger. And unfortunately if the base product is the way it is, there's little the Renaultsport guys can do about it.

Renault needed to put some distance between the 197 and the 225. The megane (to me) looks only slightly bigger physically than the 197: and if they'd given the 197 the same performance as the 225, who would buy a 225?

How's this RS Twigo coming along then Jeremy? Might be more in line with the size (and hopefully performance) of the 182...

 

[jonathon555]

Interesting. The Focus ST has a very similar power to weight ratio as the 197. Focus 1392kg 162hp/tonne v the 197 1240kg 159hp/tonne

Its the lack of torque thats killing it !

clio 197 0 - 100 18.7 secs

Clio 182 0 - 100 17.0 secs

focus st 0 - 100 16.5 secs


Through the gears hurts it as well

182 30 - 70 5.8 secs

197 30 - 70 7.3 secs

Focus st 30 - 70 5.9 secs

 

[Englebert]

Personally i think weight is the problem, and Renault are blagging. Speednz said it has been weighed at 1275kg, not much difference but it's still something.

If you use that letstorquebhp site as as guide, the 197 has a slightly better power-to-weight figure than the 172 (with Renault quoted weight). Perhaps that extra 35kg is what prevents theory matching up with reality...

 

[rich[182]]

Should have been turbo'd imo, even the new corsa is gonna be

 

[jonathon555]

Should have been turbo'd imo, even the new corsa is gonna be

Turbo'd motor = My money in Renaults pocket

Current Engine in heavy car = No way Hosay

 

[speedynz]

Interesting. The Focus ST has a very similar power to weight ratio as the 197. Focus 1392kg 162hp/tonne v the 197 1240kg 159hp/tonne

Its the lack of torque thats killing it !

clio 197 0 - 100 18.7 secs

Clio 182 0 - 100 17.0 secs

focus st 0 - 100 16.5 secs


Through the gears hurts it as well

182 30 - 70 5.8 secs

197 30 - 70 7.3 secs

Focus st 30 - 70 5.9 secs

So why is the Civic type R so much quicker then?

It has 144lbft of torque to the 197's 155lbft. Enough extra to offset the small weight difference.

If the 197 had the same sprinting ability as a CTR we would all be happy.

And going by the weight and torque figures it should have.

But it doesn't.

 

[Jeremy Townsend]

Should have been turbo'd imo, even the new corsa is gonna be

Turbo'd motor = My money in Renaults pocket

Current Engine in heavy car = No way Hosay

Yes I think I get that message !

 

[Paul J]

I think i've said it before (or maybe someone else said it), but i think perhaps it should have had a small turbo on it to help it at low revs, say below about 5,500 rpm where its naturally aspirated power takes over afterwards. Think that would have made it a better car.

This idea is flawed. Turbo's dont work like that. Power would be restricted and tail off leaving a very nasty power delivery.

The Clio is fantastic as a n/a car and although i love turbo cars, torque don't win races no matter what feable phrase's are thrown around.

imho Renault could do a lot worse than developing a decent 2.2ltr lump as per the Honda S2000.

220bhp pretty easy nowadays with suitable torque for the extra weight. Great delivery, responce and traction. Engine weight is the only downside, as i imagine space would be adaquate.

 

[rich[182]]

Yeh a 2.2 litre with 215-220 bhp and about 175 torque would have been better but you've still got the peak torque at least 3k rpm higher than a turbo'd equivalent

If they do a Cup version next year it's gonna have to find another 10bhp and 10-15 torque and loose at least 70-80kg weight imo, ok they may further improve the handling but its the straight line acceleration and particularly mid-range where the 197 is losing ground to a fair few other cars now, its no longer the leader of the pack like when the 172 first hit the scene

 

[jonathon555]

I think i've said it before (or maybe someone else said it), but i think perhaps it should have had a small turbo on it to help it at low revs, say below about 5,500 rpm where its naturally aspirated power takes over afterwards. Think that would have made it a better car.

This idea is flawed. Turbo's dont work like that. Power would be restricted and tail off leaving a very nasty power delivery.

The Clio is fantastic as a n/a car and although i love turbo cars, torque don't win races no matter what feable phrase's are thrown around.

imho Renault could do a lot worse than developing a decent 2.2ltr lump as per the Honda S2000.

220bhp pretty easy nowadays with suitable torque for the extra weight. Great delivery, responce and traction. Engine weight is the only downside, as i imagine space would be adaquate.

Just going back to the old civic R That had hardly any torque & plenty of weight yet it did 0 - 100 16.4 secs .

The 197 just doesn't add up to me it should be a much faster car than it actually is ?

I am now totally confused .

My old nissan gti-r used to have throttle bodies & a turbo as standard so it revved like a 16 v but pulled like a turbo.

My current evo revs to 7500 rpm, thats got a turbo to.

 

[jonathon555]

Yeh a 2.2 litre with 215-220 bhp and about 175 torque would have been better but you've still got the peak torque at least 3k rpm higher than a turbo'd equivalent

If they do a Cup version next year it's gonna have to find another 10bhp and 10-15 torque and loose at least 70-80kg weight imo, ok they may further improve the handling but its the straight line acceleration and particularly mid-range where the 197 is losing ground to a fair few other cars now, its no longer the leader of the pack like when the 172 first hit the scene

For straight line pace the 182 can still cut it with all the current offering, but how high is the hot hatch bar going to go ? With this new Mazda 3 MPS coming in at 258 BHP 280 LB/FT Torque it needs a big step up.

 

[Paul J]

Yeh a 2.2 litre with 215-220 bhp and about 175 torque would have been better but you've still got the peak torque at least 3k rpm higher than a turbo'd equivalent

This is a benefit not a disadvantage! smoother torque curves without spikes allow much greater driver control and traction, lb for lb a n/a car is far far better.

 

[tameracingdriver]

This is a benefit not a disadvantage! smoother torque curves without spikes allow much greater driver control and traction, lb for lb a n/a car is far far better.

Totally agree i still much prefer the purity, responsiveness and honesty of a decent naturally aspirated engine. To me its totally natural to have to rev an engine to get power. This is why i dont get on with DERVs and some petrol turbos, in that the power comes in low down and dies off higher up the range, to me that doesnt quite seem natural.

Also, i am not that keen on the laggy responses and lack of adjustability you get with turbos, although with drive by wire throttles becoming more intrusive, even this is beginning to matter less.

 

[SimonV6]

Sadly all new cars are heavier. None are going to be as light as the 172 or 182.

the 207 GTi 150 is 1356kg

New cars are starting to make my V6 255 feel "less fat" than of late.....lol


Simon

 

[tameracingdriver]

A GTI 150 being 1356 KG?

FFS, it will hardly move!

 

[Graham Gooch]

What the clio needs is a LPT arrangement,

The is whilst a small turbo will keep that responsiveness, its lack of flow top end of the revs means it wont rev.

You can counter this with bigger turbos but , with bigger turbos comes lag. In an ideal world the 197 would be just that, 197bhp, 50-60kg lighter. If it could do current CTR performance it would sell and tbh I would of bought one

 

[fizzy_drink]

What the clio needs is a LPT arrangement,

The is whilst a small turbo will keep that responsiveness, its lack of flow top end of the revs means it wont rev.

You can counter this with bigger turbos but , with bigger turbos comes lag. In an ideal world the 197 would be just that, 197bhp, 50-60kg lighter. If it could do current CTR performance it would sell and tbh I would of bought one

What about the twin-scroll they use on the 225?

There's certainly very little lag with that one, I assure you! :evil:




For Jeremy to answer:

People wanting a small, cheap, economical car might not buy the Clio now...

...people wanting a hot-hatch might not buy the new Clio either.



My question: If you're potentially losing sales to somecustomers; who do you think you might tempt in their place, by bringing out the new model?

 

[speedynz]

I drove a version 9 Impreza WRX STI last week (this version is known for low lag and great response) and much as it would eat my 172 alive when on boost the typical low rev lethargy was still there and made it feel initially much slower, blunter and less fun.

Mr Birkett is right, overcoming weight with turbo's only addresses half of the problem and introduces another.

Even the new Lotus Europa with an aluminium chassis, composite bodywork, toothbrush sized boot and a tiny pared down cockpit weighs a claimed 995kg's (probably more in reality) so I hold little hope of modern hot hatches ever again weighing around 1000kgs.

 

[Graham Gooch]

What the clio needs is a LPT arrangement,

The is whilst a small turbo will keep that responsiveness, its lack of flow top end of the revs means it wont rev.

You can counter this with bigger turbos but , with bigger turbos comes lag. In an ideal world the 197 would be just that, 197bhp, 50-60kg lighter. If it could do current CTR performance it would sell and tbh I would of bought one

What about the twin-scroll they use on the 225?

There's certainly very little lag with that one, I assure you! :evil:

Yeah I know having driven a 225 on three seperate occasions, the only problem is the distinct lack of a vocal character, basically a tuneless blare. Its one thats going to run and run and IMHO I think the performance N/A hatch days are numbered. The modern car requires oodles of safety, safety= weight. I honestly cant see where the weight can be saved with a so called 'cup' model. Renault are genuinely going to have to revise the engine again and make its a genuine 100BHP no ps per litre as a starting point. However you have to take Renaults claimed kerb weight with a pinch of salt. I for one dont believe its down entirely to underperforming engines, add in weight in excess of the claimed and it makes more sense. So perhaps renault can shave weight off, thin glass , ally bonnet perhaps, who knows. I know one thing for 100%certain I will not buy the 197 in its current guise.

 

[Jeremy Townsend]

What about the twin-scroll they use on the 225?

There's certainly very little lag with that one, I assure you! :evil:

Yeah I know having driven a 225 on three seperate occasions, the only problem is the distinct lack of a vocal character, basically a tuneless blare. Its one thats going to run and run and IMHO I think the performance N/A hatch days are numbered. The modern car requires oodles of safety, safety= weight. I honestly cant see where the weight can be saved with a so called 'cup' model. Renault are genuinely going to have to revise the engine again and make its a genuine 100BHP no ps per litre as a starting point. However you have to take Renaults claimed kerb weight with a pinch of salt. I for one dont believe its down entirely to underperforming engines, add in weight in excess of the claimed and it makes more sense. So perhaps renault can shave weight off, thin glass , ally bonnet perhaps, who knows. I know one thing for 100%certain I will not buy the 197 in its current guise.

Change of heart ?

 

[tameracingdriver]

I think the performance N/A hatch days are numbered. The modern car requires oodles of safety, safety= weight.

I dont see why that has to be so TBH. Look at the Toyota Aygo / 107 / C1. This is a modern car, with modern safety features, and weighs around 800 kg as standard. Now this is one butt ugly car, but it does prove that a modern machine can be lightweight. Now, beef up the suspension, engine, brakes and wheels on one of those things and i see no reason why you could not have a naturally aspirated hot hatch weighing less than 900 kg. I'm sure you would agree that such a chassis with a 150+ BHP NA engine in would be quite a hoot to drive. Not to mention how economical it would be.

I think its something manufacturers should be looking more into in these days of climate obsessed hippies taking over the world.

 

[Jeremy Townsend]

I think the performance N/A hatch days are numbered. The modern car requires oodles of safety, safety= weight.

I dont see why that has to be so TBH. Look at the Toyota Aygo / 107 / C1. This is a modern car, with modern safety features, and weighs around 800 kg as standard. Now this is one butt ugly car, but it does prove that a modern machine can be lightweight. Now, beef up the suspension, engine, brakes and wheels on one of those things and i see no reason why you could not have a naturally aspirated hot hatch weighing less than 900 kg. I'm sure you would agree that such a chassis with a 150+ BHP NA engine in would be quite a hoot to drive. Not to mention how economical it would be.

I think its something manufacturers should be looking more into in these days of climate obsessed hippies taking over the world.

It's about 900kgs, much small than a Clio and with 4 star crash rating but I see what you mean.

 

[jonathon555]

I dont see why that has to be so TBH. Look at the Toyota Aygo / 107 / C1. This is a modern car, with modern safety features, and weighs around 800 kg as standard. Now this is one butt ugly car, but it does prove that a modern machine can be lightweight. Now, beef up the suspension, engine, brakes and wheels on one of those things and i see no reason why you could not have a naturally aspirated hot hatch weighing less than 900 kg. I'm sure you would agree that such a chassis with a 150+ BHP NA engine in would be quite a hoot to drive. Not to mention how economical it would be.

I think its something manufacturers should be looking more into in these days of climate obsessed hippies taking over the world.

It's about 900kgs, much small than a Clio and with 4 star crash rating but I see what you mean.

So what about the twingo, thats about the same size. That would be fast with a 182 / 197 motor in it.

For the time being i am going to hold onto my cash & wait for the king to return.

When the King car is back I will be straight to the dealers with my order.

 

[speedynz]

I think the performance N/A hatch days are numbered. The modern car requires oodles of safety, safety= weight.

I dont see why that has to be so TBH. Look at the Toyota Aygo / 107 / C1. This is a modern car, with modern safety features, and weighs around 800 kg as standard. Now this is one butt ugly car, but it does prove that a modern machine can be lightweight. Now, beef up the suspension, engine, brakes and wheels on one of those things and i see no reason why you could not have a naturally aspirated hot hatch weighing less than 900 kg. I'm sure you would agree that such a chassis with a 150+ BHP NA engine in would be quite a hoot to drive. Not to mention how economical it would be.

I think its something manufacturers should be looking more into in these days of climate obsessed hippies taking over the world.

Mr Birkett, I normally find that we think fairly similarly but on this occasion I disagree.

Firstly the Aygo weighs almost 900kgs.

Secondly, it is a tiny, basic car with a 1 litre engine, tiny wheels and tyres and a weedy chassis.

To replace a 1 litre engine with a 2 litre (surely the minimum required), fit larger wheels and tyres, bigger brakes, a stronger chassis, beefier springs and dampers and any other measures commensurate with increased performance would add far more than 100kgs.

Renault have been very focused on weight saving in recent years and are no stranger to the benifits of cutting mass in order to improve performance. Contemporary requirements for space, build integrity and safety are taking precedence over low mass/high performing hatchbacks.

If it was easy to build lightweight fast hatchbacks that also meet the previously mentioned demands of modern consumers then I think it's safe to say that Renault, along with other manufacturers would be doing so.

I truly lament the passing of the 'lighthatch' era but I think that it's something we will have to come to terms with.

Now Mr Birkett, back to your usual fine form please!

 

[tameracingdriver]

Well maybe you are right. I guess we'll just have to look to cars such as the elise if we want that sort of thing in future, and forgo practicality.