The_Pirate
ClioSport Club Member
Golf R
Sorry mate that was a typo on my part, it was supposed to say "wouldnt be a cars length between them"
ClioSport.net
This is a sample guest message. 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!
-
When you purchase through links on our site, we may earn an affiliate commission. Read more here.
0-60 times
- Thread starter Stphn1985
- Start date
Sorry mate that was a typo on my part, it was supposed to say "wouldnt be a cars length between them"
Oh so you will buy one
!! Excellent, you wont regret it, the minute you feel the g-force from all those horses you will be reaching for your cheque book. I'll help you choose one!!!!PS - have you driven a 197 with the Renault warranty remap at all - a complete different ball game to the 50% out there that do not have the patch installed, massive improvement to lower end torque and therefore 0-60 times. This is what the published 0-60 figs are based on as they were on the very early cars. Graph below.
ForceIndia
ClioSport Club Member
Gentlemans spec 200
Rolling roads results are widely acknowledged to be f**k all use for anything but comparisions. Some 197 owners you can take seriously, because you can have a discussion with them. You however, are worse than the average V6 owner.
lol, this is a thread about 0-60 times. You are then going on about around the track times. I have quoted the 0-60 times published by renault and they show the 197 to be the fastest.
I'm happy to discuss the above no problems
Have you driven a 197 with the remap?
ForceIndia
ClioSport Club Member
Gentlemans spec 200
True. As you were fan boy.
(Haven't driven a newer 197. Your the only owner I've read of making such grandiose claims of it)
have a look at the thread i started on renaultsport.co.uk's forum, i dont want to put the link in here in case i get slapped, but type in 197 cold start patch. 95% of the owners on that thread (and there are lots) have all reported an improvment in torque and acceleration. Its running to over 22 pages.
I'm not quite the numpty you have me down as. :star:
You can't really bunch the 182 and 197 as carrying a weight deficit over the 172! the 197 is a fair bit heavier, the 182 is hardly different to the 172, only difference is the twin exit exhaust but it loses the spare wheel and wheel well which probably makes it the similar.
Last edited:
Gman
ClioSport Club Member
Mt10 Zx6r golf tdi
In my opinion Clio aren't straight line fast at all, 6 seconds/7seconds, it's really nothing exciting. !72/182/197 are all too close to compare, they are all great cars, enjoy them for what do they best, leave 0-60 times for the school kids to talk about............
They're a quick hot hatch - it's all relative so comparison between similar cars are as valid as something that might make it under 4 seconds.
Gman
ClioSport Club Member
Mt10 Zx6r golf tdi
Quick hot hatch as in a-b but as for acceleration then there is a awful lot of modern day traffic that will keep up in a straight line, all i'm trying to say is that the clio's are awesome little cars but there not about 0-60 times, and the tenths of seconds that separate the 172/182/197 isn't enough to worry about.
Did own 172 Cup + 182FF
My 172 Cup was noticeably quicker than my 182FF, but then everyone with an RS that went in it used to say it felt particularly healthy.
The only mod was a Ktech stealth and it used to keep up with my mate's standard ITR DC5 to 100mph which seemed impressive.
Difficult to compare now as his DC5 is now putting out a dynoed 260bhp with all his mods and it murders my 182!!
0-60 is a bit irrelevant, all my comparisons are through 2nd 3rd and 4th gears where it matters.
The only mod was a Ktech stealth and it used to keep up with my mate's standard ITR DC5 to 100mph which seemed impressive.
Difficult to compare now as his DC5 is now putting out a dynoed 260bhp with all his mods and it murders my 182!!
0-60 is a bit irrelevant, all my comparisons are through 2nd 3rd and 4th gears where it matters.
I've not done a GPS timed run, but a handy bit of road near me facilitates occasional legal foolishness, and that sounds about right. Only one gear change which makes a big difference compared to the Willie.
up the limit from 6500 and its a whole new ball game tho mate
as said b4. timed at 5.6 in mine, with 7.2 limit......60 in 2nd gear is easily achievable then.
little taster
http://videos.streetfire.net/video/williams-vs-172_70144.htm
hmmmm know what your saying. but there is some enjoyment to be had in beating cars u really shouldnt....
[youtube]4sHSPoJKjt4[/youtube]
Cayman S Edition 1
I love the whole convo's comparing the 182 and 197. having had both I know there is a difference, hence I kept the Trophy.
Anyways, here are my results from the rolling road. Was rather annoyed that the BHP didn't gain much, however realising that the Torque had increased bu almost 10ft-lb, I realised the remap and exhuast were deffinately worth it.
Anyways, here are my results from the rolling road. Was rather annoyed that the BHP didn't gain much, however realising that the Torque had increased bu almost 10ft-lb, I realised the remap and exhuast were deffinately worth it.
But the comparison isn't against "other normal traffic", it's a thread about 0-60 times of Clios! I see what your trying to say but the whether there's other cars out there that are as quick or whether the handling is the key reason to own one isn'trelevant.
tbh I was quite impressed with a 4th gear run of 90-120kmh in my 182 recently - it seems pretty quick, quicker than I was expecting.
The_Pirate
ClioSport Club Member
Golf R
Well not really mate, ill use my Phase 1 as an example.
The 182 is 21kg's heavier than the Phase 1, the Phase 1 had a shorter throttle cable and 15" wheels (as opose to the 16" the 182 has)
Not exactly the same but enough to mention
That map is to fix a known problem with the standard map. It smooths out the horrific cold running and virtual stalling. It's to fix a f**k up that, amazingly, came with the car from the factory. It surely doesn't turn it into a hypercar?
Truth has been written.
Thats a bit pendatic - but you proved my point!! I said the 1#2s are more or less the same - 20kg difference!? that's like less than a possible difference between drivers! or less than half a tank of fuel! 80kg+ plus is worth mentioning not 20.
I believe gearing is different between the ClioSports, that would make a bigger difference IMO.
Last edited:
The_Pirate
ClioSport Club Member
Golf R
Not pedantic mate just making clear whats different about them, its just when you said theres not much difference there is actually.
The ratio's are different from a Phase One and the Phase two.
This has been done to death, and as i said earlier theres too many mitigating factors. The main probaly being that no two are built the same..!
The ratio's are different from a Phase One and the Phase two.
This has been done to death, and as i said earlier theres too many mitigating factors. The main probaly being that no two are built the same..!
Cayman S Edition 1
Not quite sure why you've got such a beating here mate, but fair play for keeping your cool.
LoL at "beating".
I'm sure some people on here need a suite of smilies to follow every post, or it's a torrent of abuse. Taking CS seriously FTL.
Alan, I'm sure you're right, and that's good. I'm just saying it isn't likely to have turned it into a hypercar. They are all roughly the same performance.
I'm sure some people on here need a suite of smilies to follow every post, or it's a torrent of abuse. Taking CS seriously FTL.
Alan, I'm sure you're right, and that's good. I'm just saying it isn't likely to have turned it into a hypercar. They are all roughly the same performance.
They've not owned one like we have, they can't really provide an accurate appraisal
You don't have to own one to know they're all around the same performance. Or is this now a general 182 vs. 197 thread? LoL fanboys FTL. You should buy a V6.
Sorry to go on but 20kg to my mind is "not much difference" - it's nothing worth mentioning (a variation of 2% of the weight of the car). It's the equivalent to a variation of a few bhp which happens between engines.
So yes I'd say they're all the same/similar performance, there's probably some quicker ones and some slower ones in all guises (I've driven 2 sluggish 182s and one which felt much more urgent)
They all look quite similar too but loads of people insist on posting pictures of them underneath railway arches or after they've cleaned and "detailed" them. Do people buy Clios to wash them as that might not be what they're about either :clown:
this logic could be applied to 80% of posts which if they didn't exist it'd be a bit quiet on here; my point is, being a "Clio forum", any thread relating to Clios is valid.
I am too scared to drive a V6, thats the honest truth i'd crash it LOL.
Lets bury this whole fan boy malarky. I have owned a 172 for 18 months, a 182 for nearly 3 years and now I own a 197. The only notable ones i have not owned are a trophy, V6 and phase 1 172. You'll struggle to find me slagging off any of the above, as i haven't experienced them. When someone slags off a 197 (not you necessarily), i'll step in to defend its honor. I did the same when i owned a 182 and was on here.
The original thread was what is the fastest 0-60 clio on paper. Apart from a V6, in standard form its a 197. The cupped 182 and 172s are faster.
I would 100% understand if someone had driven a 197 without the patch and found it to have poor bottom end torque and "slow" - I know i did. But when i had the patch installed, i noticed the difference along with other 197 owners. It feels a lot more like the claimed 6.9 seconds. So you need to drive one of these to be able to comment - come round and drive mine if you like?
Thats all.
xxYou mean not me period. I love the 197 and think it's 10 times the car.
take a look down the side roads i pull out of when you drive passed, they are still sheet ice
. 5mph along there this morning and the front slid sideways down a slope. I'll race you along there for fun?! 
