1.6 Clio, first pics!

[Philip.]

Hey all, taken me a while to get round to posting pictures of the car, been very busy in Uni.

Got it a few months back, had a VTR and wanted something a little more solid, the 1.6 engine is just nice, and better that what I was wanting (a 172) on the insurance.

Plans are as follows;

Lowering on Sportlines for now
Refurb alloys in Graphite Grey, same colour as I did the door badges.
Rs Grill.

Cheers, Phil.








Would of got pics of the front, but it was too close to the wall and I couldn't be arsed moving it :approve:

 

[Cooksport]

looks nice mate, give it a good clean

 

[Philip.]

Cheers man.

I would do, if 2-3 inches of snow hadn't of fallen this evening
It's alot more mucky now!

 

[Cooksport]

Actually on second thoughts, clean it after winter!

Turn it into a track ****!

 

[Brett]

Looks good mate. Colour coding, coilovers and some nice alloys would look realy good.

 

[st3ve]

Nice one, nippy little motor is the K4M, whats the group on these now, they was group 10 when I had mine ftl

 

[Paul.M]

whats the group on these now, they was group 10 when I had mine ftl

group 8 iirc


And good motors the 1.6's I miss mine
few subtle mods and you will be laughing

 

[bmh.01]

group 8 iirc


And good motors the 1.6's I miss mine
few subtle mods and you will be laughing

Post Jun 02 they went to grp 8 for some reason, ph1s and previous to that are 10 iirc.

Miss mine looked quite good I thought when i'd finished with it

 

[Paul.M]

Post Jun 02 they went to grp 8 for some reason, ph1s and previous to that are 10 iirc.

I never knew that ... wierd how they changed it

Did look spot on that aswell

 

[Leeshez]

Was it and jobs a good un

 

[T. 12 E E D.]

Looky reallz nice mate Keep the mods subtle and your sorted

 

[Gazzman_Clio]

looks good buddy, do as they say above and it'l be smart. cant wait to get mine in march!

 

[Mickb]

1.6 is a nice car, still got mine. well engine anyways

 

[GavC]

Great looking car! Is it quick for a 1.6? Some nice plans lowering it will make it look 10 times better!

Your side bullets look really nice in the graphite gray!

 

[MT AUDIO]

same colour as mine,i started with a vtr before and the build is just that much better (citroen are that bad)

actually quite miss it

 

[geordieracer]

Loved mine when I had it. dont have any pics now as lost them all on my photofcuket account for some reason.

Mods i did were lowered on Eibach prolines
16" OZ Super-Ts
RS Clio Grill
Painted dash strips and gear insert black
Silver side badges
KTEC STainless Sport Stealth exhaust
K&N Panel filter

OEM+ is definitely the way forward with these

Good engine I thought, pulls well and is about later model Saxo VTR pace. Not very commom in 1.6 guise either, so most people will think its a 1.2/1.4. Mine did have a penchant for iginition coils though, and they aint cheap when you need them at real short notice to drive to work, and have to go to Renault.

Enjoy it mate.

 

[Cliotoby]

Noice, get some 172 alloys on there and sit it on some decent springs, have it mapped and get a adecent pannel filter in there and itll be reet. I dont know how different Your K4m 1.6 16v is to mine other than power, but its not a bad engine, i would imagine that yours goes very well.

 

[jim cook]

Looks a good motor enjoy ( Also been down the Vtr route )

 

[Will.]

Post Jun 02 they went to grp 8 for some reason, ph1s and previous to that are 10 iirc.

Please dont turn that into another ph1 = Ph-quick lol

 

[Brett]

Please dont turn that into another ph1 = Ph-quick lol

ph1's are quicker

 

[Philip.]

Cheers for all the good comments, and the pictures posted of other 1.6s look great!

It's so solid compared to the VTR, which seemed so highly strung all the time, felt like it was going to break 24/7!

 

[Martin_172]

my mrs has a minter 53 plate with climate, traction control, cruise control, electric everything, full cabasse setup with 6 disk changer

get the resonator off it and just put a straight feed to the battery tray area, sounds mental, stick a laguna F4R throttle body on it, decat and manifold, Sorted!

not very economical these at all right enough, pitty they didnt rev like the wee twingos do or they would have been a hit, brilliant engine the k4m really refined just slightly boring and uneconomical (dont worry i wont do my usual DCi preaching! lol)

shame they didnt use the 4th engine mount on these like they did with the 172/dci 100, im modding my mrs subframe and putting one on it to get rid of the engine/gearstick movement

 

[geordieracer]

are you thinking of the same car? Mine was pretty economical, easily get 40mpg with mixed driving.

 

[Martin_172]

are you thinking of the same car? Mine was pretty economical, easily get 40mpg with mixed driving.

yes. my mrs averages 36mpg and she drives like a gimp!

 

[Chesh]

yes. my mrs averages 36mpg and she drives like a gimp!

In a latex mask?

 

[DannoTheGreat]

pics of her in said gimp mask

 

[geordieracer]

yes. my mrs averages 36mpg and she drives like a gimp!

Thats hardly uneconomical tbh. I have been getting 20mpg from my 306 lately.

 

[Martin_172]

Thats hardly uneconomical tbh. I have been getting 20mpg from my 306 lately.

mate its a 110bhp car its not even a warm hatch!!! my 172 would average mid 30's when driven normally and i dont mean slow i just mean normally flowing with traffic, driven hard it would still get low 20's when really going for it

i got better mpg from the 172 than the 1.6 gets driven the same, which is shocking for something thats not even aimed at being quick where you can accept the fuel consumption.

190lb/ft & 60mpg ftw.

ps. id get your 306 checked out!

 

[geordieracer]

mate its a 110bhp car its not even a warm hatch!!! my 172 would average mid 30's when driven normally and i dont mean slow i just mean normally flowing with traffic, driven hard it would still get low 20's when really going for it

i got better mpg from the 172 than the 1.6 gets driven the same, which is shocking for something thats not even aimed at being quick where you can accept the fuel consumption.

190lb/ft & 60mpg ftw.

ps. id get your 306 checked out!

Any car driven hard ish will return poorer mpg figures.

Absoloutley no need to get it checked out. They are well known to drink fuel when driven enthusiastically. And that's why i bought it, to enjoy driving it. if i wanted to potter about I would have stuck with my old car. Can easily get 30mpg plus if i drive sensibly.

 

[Martin_172]

lol screw that a 172 will still average mid 20's when driven hard, even my old one wouldnt drop under 20mpg when driven hard., if i was driving something that got 20mpg id want something genuinely fast.

 

[geordieracer]

Its not all about the speed. The GTI6 is a very well regarded hot hatch, and is a great drive, and has given a few people a surprise when they think they can just put their foot down and leave me, especially on twisty b-roads.

Back on topic, the 1.6 is a very good drive too, and with some careful modding will surprise a few things on anything except 0-60 runs.

 

[Tigger]

Nice car there Phill

 

[Martin_172]

how do you compair it to the VTR performance wise? i find my car is pretty much on par with standard VTS's and my mrs 1.6 16v isnt a million miles behind compaired to mine so i take it its a bit quicker than the VTR? bit less torquey than the wee 8v lump low down?

 

[iimushroomzii]

The 1.6 Clio should be way better than a VTR performance wise!

 

[Martin_172]

10bhp more than a vtr with more weight, not much in it i wouldnt have thought

 

[Dink]

my 1.6 was a bit quicker than a vtr but not a great deal tbh

 

[st3ve]

Martin if you look at the figures a VTR is 90bhp and a 1.6 clio does 0-60 in 9.3 seconds ish so it's considerably quicker than a VTR, believe me, I know.

However it is underpowered for what it is, I believe you could extract at least 130bhp from it and still return good mpg, the fact that Renault didn't do this suggests they did it so that the Renault Sports can stand out that little bit more in my personal opinion.

In fact theres a member on here whos got somewhere around that figure from a K4m iirc?

 

[Philip.]

It's quicker top end than the VTR, only because of the 16v's.
Feels boggy down the low end because of that too.

My VTR was pretty nippy anyway with the Manifold, exhaust system etc etc
So there's not that much difference overall!

 

[Martin_172]

Martin if you look at the figures a VTR is 90bhp and a 1.6 clio does 0-60 in 9.3 seconds ish so it's considerably quicker than a VTR, believe me, I know.

However it is underpowered for what it is, I believe you could extract at least 130bhp from it and still return good mpg, the fact that Renault didn't do this suggests they did it so that the Renault Sports can stand out that little bit more in my personal opinion.

In fact theres a member on here whos got somewhere around that figure from a K4m iirc?

not a ph2 VTR they are 100bhp and do 0-60 in 9.1 seconds book time which is actually .3 of a second quicker to 60 than a 1.6 16v clio but obviously thats nothing on the road, not work arguing over anyway.

you will never get 130bhp and good mpg from one, the standard inlet manifold is balls so needs to be first to go, to get the 130 mark then your going to need a custom inlet/itb's, cams and standalone management.

power you will get what ever you want from it, afterall the S1600 cars run the same engine with 220bhp! its all down to cash!

renault never under powered the engine to make the 172 any better, they just took a bog standard laguna/megane engine and put it in the clio, it was never intended as anything other than it actually is, hence why it comes with shoddy tyres and a soft suspension setup as standard.

however i do like them!

 

[EllisC]

Well well look who finally posted pics haha. Hows it goin man? U recoverd from the handbrake incident in the snow? Town was shat btw too!