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!
Hi brun, sorry to tell you but i think ill drop out of the rr day, didnt see the point of putting my car on the roller when its standard engine wise, perhaps other poeple on the standby can take my place, sorry about that but ill still turn up and meet some of you guys though.
Hi brun, sorry to tell you but i think ill drop out of the rr day, didnt see the point of putting my car on the roller when its standard engine wise, perhaps other poeple on the standby can take my place, sorry about that but ill still turn up and meet some of you guys though.
i had the same problem mate, when it parked up it can look even or uneven depends on where you park, the back seems to be higher then the front sometimes, but on a flat ground the car is level
Nick i have found that the ride are better on my car with 17s rather then 14s, i think its because when the car was on 14s the springs compress more closely, and when it sat on 17s the springs spread out more, allowing better spring travel
Nick i have found that the ride are better on my car with 17s rather then 14s, i think its because when the car was on 14s the springs compress more closely, and when it sat on 17s the springs spread out more, allowing better spring travel
the 19s has not blunt the performance as bad as expected, from the start is a little bit slower but once the car rolling is the same as it were on 17s, being a 2.0 probably help too
the picture are a bit crap btw
before (lowered on -60mm springs)
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid26/pf18cdd7d8e18e8b870b91f49a0d12de6/fd84e5d3.jpg
after (17s technomagnesio)
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid26/p9d9043eebe0a2eae2074c7a44b44cc53/fd84de38.jpg...
the 19s has not blunt the performance as bad as expected, from the start is a little bit slower but once the car rolling is the same as it were on 17s, being a 2.0 probably help too
the picture are a bit crap btw
before (lowered on -60mm springs)
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid26/pf18cdd7d8e18e8b870b91f49a0d12de6/fd84e5d3.jpg
after (17s technomagnesio)
http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid26/p9d9043eebe0a2eae2074c7a44b44cc53/fd84de38.jpg...
HILLY i have seen the sabre bodykit for the clio, its ******* nice, you lucky b*****d , how much is the work? and if you can can you tell me the price for a bad boy bonnet?
Rich-D you are welcome on here any time mate, the way i see it is more member the better
btw as stated b4 a 106 GTi would be even with a 172 over short sprints and better on a tight track
Rich-D you are welcome on here any time mate, the way i see it is more member the better
btw as stated b4 a 106 GTi would be even with a 172 over short sprints and better on a tight track
PiperX induction kit are quite from what ive heard from other 1.2 16v owners, having a cotton gauze one will make more sound
(got my k-tec catalogue today and they do a JR induction kit for a 1.2 16v)
its not worth spending 250 quid for a viper kit for a 1.2 16v IMO, you wont see much of a power gain on small engines, so wont bother with a engine of < 1.8, if you want a induction kit with some noise then you then modify a K&N induction kit (1.4 16v one) to fit into your 1.2 16v
i bought my car from Renault Oldham, the salesman Liam is very helpful, but the service department are not great, took my car in for them to fix my seat, they fixed it after the 3rd attempt and not once did it come back valeted.
i bought my car from Renault Oldham, the salesman Liam is very helpful, but the service department are not great, took my car in for them to fix my seat, they fixed it after the 3rd attempt and not once did it come back valeted.
i dont mind about performance as i dont think theres any induction kit on the planet would make a difference to a 1.2 16v, just after little bit of noise thats all