Search results

LOL:D......You made that up about deleting the post;) Its easy when side by side comparing the difference, all i was trying to say is that a quick glance in the rear view mirror and the average person would just think it was a normal clio.

Yep you probably did, ZR was my 1st car but crashed it. I just dont think theres a big enough difference for the untrained eye to notice.

True its lower and the splitter is different but i know that because im a car enthusiast. To the average joe who has no interest in cars he/she probably wouldnt be able to tell the difference if he was behind or in front of you looking back through his mirror. Well not until you put the foot...

In the past year ive had a £15000 CTR, a £10000 scooby and now a £16000 LCR225. The year before i had a new ZR160 which cost £15500 Im sure i could have saved my dinner money for a clio matey:oops: Take the sport badge off a 172/cup and how would you know the difference from the rear? From...

No, im not speaking out of my arse. There is hardly any difference to the average eye. Youd have to know your clios to know the difference. Like i said a bit girly IN MY OPINION!

Rare.....LOL The clio is not rare mate. Its 1 of the most common cars on the road. It appeals because of the price and because of the price brings popular demand. Popular demand = Common!!! To the average eye there is no distinguishing features between a 1.2 and a 2.0

Aggressive?? The V6 looks agressive the 172/182 looks no better than the 1.2 versioned clio, a bit girly IMO Cheap, fast, and fun however so wins a lot of people over. Its still a clio though:oops:

MGZR105 with 102bhp springs to mind as best 1.4

Nick, how can you plead not guilty? Do they not have evidence? Well they must do to prosecute? On what basis are you pleading not guilty? If you were doing the speed then just have the balls to admit it and apologise. Theyll probably give you a harsher sentence also.

Your points are valid for 4 years

10mph innacuracy @ 90mph.....LOL Maybe when your doing 150-160mph. Your going 90mph on your speedo, guesses are youve been caught at 86-87mph. 3pts £60 fine for definite. I got the same when i was caught doing 97mph.

Wouldnt bother with the hassle on a 1.2

Are you on about 1/4 or 60mph? It would have to be a dragster to get that sorta time for a 1/4

Jesus, he has never claimed outright acceleration so whats the point in a 1/4 mile test? Clio cup runs 14.8 and ZR160 runs a 15.5, theres no denying that. This is more dedicated to handling performance rather than outright acceleration. Everyone on here thinks a clio is a monster on a track...

Doesnt mean a thing! Ive seen a scooby sti run a 16.5 1/4 before. Put your girlfriend in your car and it will be a 16 sec 1/4miler. All down to the driver matey. A lot more so than the actual performance of the car. Seat leon cupras (180 not R) run 15.7 1/4 miles all day long

Ricjax you really are a numpty.... Its 172/182 vs ZR160, wheres this 110bhp crap coming from? People on cliosport seem to think a clio is indestructable on a track.Id pretty much say rally matt knows what hes talking about, he is indeed a professional rally driver. He doesnt claim the 160 is...

Against a 172 cup, i can imagine it being pretty equal until 110 or so and then the LCR will probably stretch the legs. 0-60 comes in 6.5 and 100 comes in 16.5, so pretty much similar to cup/172. Revo/jabba the car and it goes like a missile though, some people managing to get 162mph GPS...

Is it the new 182 cup your on about or a 182 with cup package? How much are you gettin the car for mate? An audi S3 is a more classy car and has great tuning potential however a good 1 is going to cost you £15-16000

Id love to see this... A ZR thrashing a 182 round a circuit. You betta be awesome on the track tom otherwise your going to be eating your words. The 182 may be a faster car than a 160 but put a rally driver in the 160 and an amateur in the 182 then LOL!!!!

On what basis? Have you ever driven 1? Thought not! It certainly beats a clio in the looks department. The rear end of a clio is hideous! On a par with the other rear end crap reno produce the megane.

My sis has a zr 160 its an awesome sounding engine as is the 172 - but not in a million years would the 160 be sitiing on the bumper of a 172! A well driven VTS will stay close to a 172 so why not the MG?

I think you lot are being a bit harsh on the ZR. It weighs more, has less power and less torque but would still hold onto a 172. Not saying it would beat it, but a 172 would defo not be losing it. 158/128 vs 170/147........The 172 is lighter also. IMO it looks a lot better than the clio...

What did they improve from 172 cup to 182 in handling terms?

I have these 2 cars in mind as my next car as insurance for my new proposed car was a big no-no. Wouldnt even entertain me on it! My question is, which is a better car round a track? From magazines and test reviews between the 172 Cup and CTR, the CTR always seemed to post a quicker laptime...

20bhp increase with a 100kg increase in weight. Cars are supposed to get faster, not remain the same!! Goodnight vienna!!!!

A CTR is a hot hatch BTW, not a family sized sports hatch! Thats what a golf gti is or 1.8 zetec focus. No point in arguin, all ill say is what the majority of other cliosport members have expressed. Dissapointment if thats whats on the line in 2-3 yrs time. A 20bhp increase with a 100kg...

Nothing will match it in supermini group. Plenty to overpower it in hothatch though especially 2-3 yrs down the line.