172 cup vs Williams

[TheJesus]

Quote: Originally posted by .Griff. on 23 March 2005

TBH this post is going to do nothing but go over old ground.

How many laps are we talking? Can we make it 100 and then the 10 year old might fall apart....

true, Williams would probably not make that... but the 172 would be lucky to get off the ramps at Reno in the first place.

if you look at the majority of posts its either 172/182 back at the dealers... or "just washed my standard car thats identical to the next mans in appearance..." (do we care???) and in fact about a million other ones that rolled off the production line". Only difference in MK2s seems to be what faults they leave the factory with. I heard that Reno are bring out top trumps for the MK2 Clios, the winner is decided by the amount of faults, each one being given a monetary rating.

 

[miketheman2k]

Quote: Originally posted by Andyvalver on 23 March 2005


http://server3.uploadit.org/files/Andyvalver-IMG_1996.jpghttp://server3.uploadit.org/files/Andyvalver-IMG_1996.jpg

You dont see many 172s goin round corners like this Well, maybe some

That is true class! What a car.

 

[Lagerlout]

I dont think that anyone who owns a Clio can chastise another about build quality or reliabilty. They are no better and no worse than each other.

As far as performance goes, the Williams may have more feel and be easier to drive on the limit.... but is it necessarily faster?? Debateable.

Swervin_Mervin... None of the Renaultsport Clios would spank each other around corners.... sure some are better than others but they are all within a gnats knacker of each other. If you think your ten year old relic can lose me through a few bends then bring it on..........

 

[Ian_182]

The true owners of these cars know they both cost a sh*tload to keep,either through warranty or willy badge ownership

Magazines have quoted the willy as having the temprament of an integrale

Most have quoted the mk2 on here as having a good few gripes.

In all they are similar on build quality,with the willy having less standard spec to go wrong than a 172

The only figures i have to compare is in EVO when they tested the new mk2 against the willy and it was near on identical.However..............

The mk2 was slightly quicker to 60mph and a good 2. something quicker to 100mph............the mk2 was better on the brakes and better at pulling more "G" in a corner............And it also lapped a bit quicker around a tight twisty circuit.

But all said ......for a 13 year old car to do this to a clio mk2 was an achievment in itself

But anyway,,,,knock a few kgs off and the cup would be quicker still

All tests were done by pros on the same day so cant be dissputed really

ian..................................

 

[Martin]

The Cup should be quicker in a straight line and round a track.....but its not always the case. I think a quick williams would beat a poor 172 cup straight line, track, b-road well anywhere basically. Overall though the cup should be quicker...as it should be after 10 yrs of automotive progress not to mention the extra 20 bhp!

 

[Winston]

To quote <A name=14819>Mark_Ritchspeed

Oh as an aside the Pembrey trackday that Cliosport did . The best lap that any Clio did round there in bone dry conditions was precisely 2 seconds slower than I managed in torrential rain in my old Willy 3.

See this post

http://www.williamsclio.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1395http://www.williamsclio.co.uk/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1395



[Edited by Winston on 23 March 2005 at 10:59pm]

 

[Lagerlout]

Thats fair enough Winston, but I feel that may have more to do with the driver than the car....and we are talking standard vs satandard here...

 

[Griff]

Certain Williams owners beleive that its the best car ever made and will not hear a bad word against it. While I agree its a classic hot hatch I also live in the real world...

Someone will also say they have evidence of a Williams beating a Scooby, Evo, Enzo, 747, Dels robin Reliant, Thunderbird 2...

Flame away, bored of these Williams Vs the world threads anyway.

 

[Winston]

Quote: Originally posted by lagerlout1 on 23 March 2005

Thats fair enough Winston, but I feel that may have more to do with the driver than the car....and we are talking standard vs satandard here...

Very true about the driver lol

marks williams 3 was standard, even standard suspension



To quote the king


if he was two seconds a lap quicker than other clios then other people have two choices:


1. realise he is a better driver and acknowledge when he stated the william is better it is


2. acknowledge the car is faster

there is no other conclusion

 

[Winston]

Quote: Originally posted by .Griff. on 23 March 2005

Certain Williams owners beleive that its the best car ever made and will not hear a bad word against it. While I agree its a classic hot hatch I also live in the real world...

Someone will also say they have evidence of a Williams beating a Scooby, Evo, Enzo, 747, Dels robin Reliant, Thunderbird 2...

Flame away, bored of these Williams Vs the world threads anyway.

Cup owners are just as bad

 

[POWARTEK]

Maybe the cup is quicker in a line, but what does the BHP per tonne work out to for both these cars?



Taking into consideration the years between the cars the willy is still 1 hell of a car.

The Williams wins.

 

[182_blue]

time to post some breasts it think

 

[Daz]

Quote: Originally posted by .Griff. on 23 March 2005


Flame away, bored of these Williams Vs the world threads anyway.

Eh?

Its just normally in defence of 172/182 owners, to be fair.

How many Cups have mullered WRX STis? Pah..

 

[Sport182]

lol will my post take this to page 3!?!

My money would be on the 172 cup or full fat.

While the Williams was a great car its just passed it in my opinion.

Maybe in its day but not today!!!

 

[Dave H]

Standard V standard......the Cup wins on sprints and around tracks according to every article lve read.After modding who knows? A cup with 182 stripes V a Williams with a 300 bhp engine under the bonnet and race spec suspension.....the Williams wins!
I would never dis the Williams though....l have owned 3 205 1.9 gtis and l KNOW that they have much more feel than my Cup has.
Big-up to the classic massiv

 

[Swervin_Mervin]

So youve never driven either Rallypug and are going entirely off what a magazine says?

 

[Mk1_MATT]

Quote: Originally posted by Andyvalver on 23 March 2005


http://server3.uploadit.org/files/Andyvalver-IMG_1996.jpghttp://server3.uploadit.org/files/Andyvalver-IMG_1996.jpg

You dont see many 172s goin round corners like this Well, maybe some



[Edited by Andyvalver on 23 March 2005 at 3:56pm]



That picture is incredible, thats why i love both of these cars, they both look so fun going round corners.. if only my RT could give me some lift off :-( heres a question, which one is better insurance wise, i am only 19 so this is a major concern for me.. another thing with the 172cup, i dont think many appreciate it until you fly past them, i think it deserves more respect!!

 

[blink172]

Holy sh*t box

http://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y39/blink172/Andyvalver-IMG_1996.jpg

Picture stolen from andy so everyone can see a legend at work!

 

[Dave H]

Wait a minute! I said that l have owned 3 205s which are close to a Williams and l own a Cup! So l know what lm talking about.I havent raced them on a track so have gone off articles and owners from this site & the 205gti forum.
Is there anything wrong with that?

 

[Swervin_Mervin]

205s arent close to a Willy though! Missed the Cup bit so soz.

 

[Lagerlout]

Quote: Originally posted by Winston on 23 March 2005

Quote: Originally posted by lagerlout1 on 23 March 2005

Thats fair enough Winston, but I feel that may have more to do with the driver than the car....and we are talking standard vs satandard here...

Very true about the driver lol

marks williams 3 was standard, even standard suspension



To quote the king


if he was two seconds a lap quicker than other clios then other people have two choices:


1. realise he is a better driver and acknowledge when he stated the william is better it is


2. acknowledge the car is faster

there is no other conclusion

As usual there are holes in the Kings thesis...... He may have been better than the other Clio drivers there on that day and he may have gone quicker in the Williams, but hes not the best driver there is, and as far as I can tell isnt even a professional. So Im not likely to accept his judgement as gospel, rather just respect his opinion.

Put a top BTCC driver in a Cup and it will be faster than the Williams. Does that automatically make the Cup better? No.


[Edited by lagerlout1 on 24 March 2005 at 11:41am]

 

[Dave H]

No worries,mate
Have heard a lot about the two being quite close though.

 

[Swervin_Mervin]

Quote: Originally posted by lagerlout1 on 24 March 2005
Quote: Originally posted by Winston on 23 March 2005 Quote: Originally posted by lagerlout1 on 23 March 2005 Thats fair enough Winston, but I feel that may have more to do with the driver than the car....and we are talking standard vs satandard here... [/QUOTE]Very true about the driver lolmarks williams 3 was standard, even standard suspension To quote the king&lt;DIR&gt;&lt;FONT color=#ff0000 size=2&gt;if he was two seconds a lap quicker than other clios then other people have two choices:&lt;FONT face="MS Sans Serif" size=2&gt;&lt;/DIR&gt;&lt;DIR&gt;1. realise he is a better driver and acknowledge when he stated the william is better it is&lt;FONT face="MS Sans Serif" size=2&gt;&lt;/DIR&gt;&lt;DIR&gt;2. acknowledge the car is faster&lt;/DIR&gt; there is no other conclusion [/QUOTE]As usual there are holes in the Kings thesis...... He may have been better than the other Clio drivers there on that day and he may have gone quicker in the Williams, but hes not the best driver there is, and as far as I can tell isnt even a professional. So Im not likely to accept his judgement as gospel, rather just respect his opinion. Put a top BTCC driver in a Cup and it will be faster than the Williams. Does that automatically make the Cup better? No.

[Edited by lagerlout1 on 24 March 2005 at 11:41am]



He does/has rallied them though fella with success.

 

[TheJesus]

I think people do forget the Williams is over 10 years old and as such I would think that there are a lot of dogs out there. Now, if these magazines did the test properley they would get a MINT (by that I mean mechanically perfect) Williams and a 172. It has to be mint if they are testing one cars performance against another, if its an article about owning one, then yeah, any old example will do. Now, having a mechanically sound standard Williams I dont think there can be anything in it, as power to weight is pretty equal, and Im told that the Cup and Williams gearing is practically the same. Either way, I dont suppose any of these tests were conducted properly. If they got somone like 2 lives car with his standard engine in that ran 14.7 1/4 mile and then his Megane one that after he rebuilt ran 14.6 or a similar one with MINT engine internals it would have to come down to handling. The faster 172/Cups run similar times to this for the faster ones off the site do they not?

 

[Dave H]

Evo magazine has well respected journalist who have tested everything from a Punto Sporting to a Zonda over two decades.They always pit a mint older car against the newer type(ie mint Lotus carlton v RS4 V Jag S type / 205gti V CTR etc etc).I would say that this mag is the best out there if you want facts.And they do give the Willy 5 stars! My cup gets 4 1/2 stars.

 

[Munson]

What are the weights of the two cars? According to results I found through Google, the Willy is 1013kg and the 172 Cup is 979kg...doesnt sound at all right to me. Id have thought it would be the other way around if anything?

If we were talking pure figures and straight line speed, then we can work out the bhp/ton if we have some reliable weights. The 172Cup has a not insignificant 20lb/ft torque advantage to get it on its way, although much of this would be cancelled out by the extra weight I guess (if its heavier - see above)

[Edited by Roy Munson on 3/24/2005 2:58:23 PM]

 

[Andyvalver]

http://cliosport.net/specs/williams.asphttp://cliosport.net/specs/williams.asp

http://cliosport.net/specs/clio172cup.asphttp://cliosport.net/specs/clio172cup.asp

The willy is lighter according to this site (cliosport)

 

[Swervin_Mervin]

Willy = 977kg
172 = 1335kg

According to ukcar

But 172 seems high so Whatcar says 1070kg

 

[Lagerlout]

lol @ 1335 kg!!!

172 Cup is 1021kg, Mk2 172 is 1110kg iirc .... makes sense becuase the Renault blurb for the Cup said it was 89kg lighter....

Williams is 981kg.... but Cup still has higher bhp/ton ration.


[Edited by lagerlout1 on 24 March 2005 at 3:41pm]

 

[Dave H]

Some testing includes the weight of a driver.Again in the back of Evo theres figures for most cars.Willy is defo lighter than a cup due to build regs etc.
Rather than go into the ins and outs of gearing/pwr/engine design/torque etc l think that we should trust what the test results were.A 172 cup is quicker to 60 in a sprint (both standard of course with same driver/conditions etc). Ive never seen a test that says different! I would also say that as the in-gear times are better (just) the Cup should win on a track on the same day with the same driver.
Is there anyone who has owned both,in standard trim who would disagree as l have never had a Williams (nearly said never had a willy then )?