Search results

He crashed, so he didn't beat anyone.

Not completely sure what you just said but maybe if you were not racing, you would have managed to avoid the incident?

Sounds impressive. Subtle is the way forward!

Yeah, he can't drive.

What does that actually mean?

LOL - don't race on public roads!

As said, owning a Fiesta and spending mega bucks on it sounds a bit silly when you could buy something faster and nicer but if you are into projects and one-offs, then it must be a good feeling completing something like that, regardless of cost. Have to say, there are loads of ST's going about...

I agree with your 185 comments but I think Ford were trying to lure in a slightly younger market, with a lower insurance band, good mpg, decent performance etc.

It is for you, by the sounds of it. C2 VTS, wtf. Stright? c**k.

Mare. You need Nos! Sounds like you can't drive or your car is busted. There is a reasonable difference in performance between these cars.

The Clio's interior is no worse than the ST's IMO. Really not a fan of the Ford interiors. I think if you try the Clio, you will notice a difference and prefer it.

Have you sat in a S2000? The cabimn is tiny! Sounds like you have made your decision anyway, albeit the wrong one!!:rasp: Didn't take long for the photos...

S2000 - no contest.

Eh...not sure what you are asking here? Do you mean the fans don't replicate wind speed at 100mph and therefore don't allow enough air into the engine?

That looks about as sporty as a chip supper.

So is it inconsistent manufacturing that causes the power loss and is there always an expected power loss percentage expected on every car built? Seems it's common knowledge that Cliosports tend not to make their quoted power.

A lot of threads recently have been talking about power figures. If, as stated by many people on here, Cliosports don’t make their stated power, does that mean they don’t make their stated 0 to 60. 100, whatever times? Rolling roads are apparently not accurate, so how is this being measured or...

No bad that.

Not pointless if the person who asked the question doesn't know. Drivers aside, there ain't much of a difference between the cars in a straight line.

Nobody refers to the ATW power/tonne.

According to Evo... Renaultsport Clio Cup 02-04 4/1998 170/6250 1011kg 171 6.5 138 - Bargain old-school hot hatch Nervous in the wet. No ABS

Well on paper they produce 170bhp and weigh 1090kg. You do the math.... Probably around 168bhp/tonne.

Get the bus until it's worth it.

Not much between them.

Not very well.

From the pics it looks very replica. Ain't foolin' anyone!

Might be a touch quicker. Evo has the 0-60 as 5.9 but this seems optimistic!

That's all very well, provided you don't think the 1.4 is as capable as the 182, 197 and 225, in anyway performance wise. Put 'Andi' in the sports and see what happens.

That's an OPINION not a FACT. FAIL.

BMW!!! Not biased at all btw! It's a great car to drive, you can get 30mpg if you try and it has every toy known to automotive man. They perform nicely too, easily keep up with an ST, if not quicker, RWD!!! and they sound nice too. They also look a lot better than all Fords. No contest imo!