Search results

There's no difference.

Don't do it! Not after/with the M.

That could indeed happen. The light-weight Sony LCD is the better option though. At the end of the day, it get's dark.

Well you buy a car for a reason. The Cup is different in many ways to the standard 172, therefore people justify this, through bickering or otherwise. There is maybe negligble difference in performance on the public roads but there is a difference how ever it's experienced. I had mine over...

Slightly off topic but there is a good write-up in Evo regarding the Trophy's suspension, and the cost of fixing/refurbing them.

...nobody would have bought them!! Each company surely need a top of the range model, so if all the whole range looked the same, people wouldn't be so tempted by the top spec car. I wouldn't have touched a 172 if it had looked like the V6.

You obviously don't see the opint in them. Fair enough but there is a marked difference. If you want a comfy cruiser, buy a BMW or something.

Agree with you - why don't people just leave the plates alone? Saves a lot of hassle and money.

If it's not it's trump card then what's the point in it? The main difference is the weight, which change the handling characteristics of the car compared to other Clios. Agreed, it would take a lot to make it count in the real world but the 'rawness' is a factor. It makes it feel more old...

Chav

:nono:

Look nice enough but they are pretty awful cars in terms of handling. My mate had one and it was so dull!! Performance was pretty much identical to the Cup in a straight line, but the in gear performance was terrible!! I hope you enjoy yours though.

That's life unfortunately. I'm sure you'll find a better one.

Nice. Happy stopping!

No idea how, but it was with Admiral. £7 cheaper on the BMW! That's with a £100 vol excess. Only thing I didn't go for was the breakdown cover. Yeah, the driver needs to drive the Cup! Amazing car and well worth the money. I'd have another one.

Maybe the manufacturers have seen all the idiots using the rusted bonnets, so think they don't have to use quality paints etc? The market has changed.

What Fred said. They are awesome fun, if you are looking for that raw hot hatch experience. As far as dangerous - I would say that's down to the driver. Insurance shouldn't be too bad, as you are apparently not 21 anymore. Mine was £200 fully comp at age 30. Do it!

Like an a$$hole?

My trip computer was almost bang on.

Mine averaged high 30's. Always more than 360 miles to a tank. Mid 20's sounds bad, unless you are ragging it all the time.

True that.

It's just you!

Depends how you drive. People have driven for 10's and 10's of years without ABS. Sure, it's a handy thing to have but it doesn't mean it's dangerous not to have it. How often do you lock up the wheels?

Nice job but I prefer the Porsche.

Black wheels would look better.

I don't think we will all agree with your statement. It's not a car that will be remembered, like the Williams or R26.R etc, and the Cup, of course, and I personally don't think it compares with the Clio - more so the Megane, Golf and Civic. I guess we will have to wait for more tests and...

Smart answer...because Renault recommend you use this fuel as it's better for the engine. Less smart answer...they do run better on this fuel, imo. Not faster but a bit smoother, less lumpy. Probably cleaner too.

Only you know this. As for it being a girly engine (1.2)...you might be slightly sexist with that comment but I don't think you should worry about that. It's more likely people will laugh at any mods you have, unless they are subtle. Leave the 172 until the insurance isn't a joke!

172 - there's no question, if you can afford it. Although it sounds like you will have it written off so maybe the 1.2 is a better option! You'll not get much more out your 1.2, performance wise. Maybe 2bhp. The mods might make it a one-of-a-kind but it's still just a 1.2 Clio. No contest imo.

Maybe to you, pal.