Search results

This doesn't always make for a fun car. Sometimes the lack of what you mentioned is more fun.

Oui!

Eh, what you on about?

Glad you've grown up!

Indeed.

I understand this but anyone can actually comment based on their knowledge...for example, you and others have owned both and have explained your experience to answer the question. I can therefore use my experience of reading these posts to comment on any future posts regarding this car query...

True that but they'd not look like a girl! :rasp:

The GTi seems to be able to beat Clios and the VTS is faster than the GTi but the VTS is slower than the Clio!! Straight line anyway. The 172 is quicker to 60, quicker to 100, not by much but is. 3 secs to 100. Throw in corners and braking and it's very close. The Clio is a faster car...

They are the same pace, it's maybe more to do with the power delivery?

Has some washer blanks though...

Clio V6

If you like the front end and have deeper pockets (than you needed on the 182), then go for it! If not, keep the 182. It seems to be a great car, performance wise. But so is the 182!

LOL at this nonsense! The 330 engine is fantastic and the car is anything but boring. I guess you only like cars where you feel a kick from the engine instead of the gradual delivery of power. The 3 litre is one of the best engines made! Yes, it could do with a touch more power but it suits...

But one is ugly. That is wrong.

Only a muppet would says this. Are you actually blind?

Mr F1, clearly.

That would be silly. Have you seen the 200?

Sounds like you should sell up. Lol at Golfs being boring!

Drive both and decide. For me, the Clio hasn't got much luxury in any form, so it didn't bother me. The Cup headlights allowed me to drive at night, the windows went down for aircon, leather just gets you sweaty in the hot weather and I never needed ABS at any point, although I can see it's...

There ain't much in it in terms of pace. You'd maybe notice a difference on a track, so putting Turinis on a 172 would look good and be a good idea. There is maybe half a second to 100 on paper but as with any 'race' or acceleration test, it's down to the driver getting it right. IMO, it'd...

Sounds like you need to get a proper cheap car until you can afford both. (Sensible head on) Just buy a 1.2 Clio or similar with minimal tax/insurance/fuel and purchase and wait until you can run a hot hatch and house together. You can make 1.2's handle nicely for the corners, since that's what...

There is no performance difference between these cars until after 100, where there Civic will have a slight edge. Not sure how you'll save money buying a car that's more expensive to insure/run? Don't buy the Clio if all you are into is 0-60.

Get a 172 or something, to save money!!! Really nice BM!

LOL at the driving course comments. The boy wants an exhaust.

Good decision! Your first wheels were nasty!

Do a wee search on the differences, as it gets discussed daily! The main difference is it's 80kg lighter. And buy a Cup!

My point is 0-60 says sod all about a car and has nothing to with being able to keep up with a better car on a given run. Being able to keep up with a Cayman is down to the driving, not the car. Not sure why the Cayman is relevant here other than its a Porsche.

Can't see any gain in doing this.

Jail talk!

Brakes.