172 vs 182

[m40ttc]

I was just wondering if a full fat 182 is much quicker than full fat 172. +10bhp is not that much more power, isnt the 182 little bit heavier to, i read that the 182 handles better but what about 0-60 or 30 to 50 something like that, cheers all matt

 

[crazycup]

nothing in it at all.

 

[Lucas]

182 is actually lighter. Still don't really think there is a great deal in it though, good and bad examples of both, so it depends.

 

[Mike-bham]

tried a few times, nout in it really.

 

[Thomss]

"Ducks" Both cool

 

[Martin]

aaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrgggggggggggghhhhhhhhhhh!

 

[Tom_E]

nothing in it, depends if you get a good one out of the factory..apprantly some can vary in power?? and are not exact.

 

[Jim NM]

To compare 182 and 172 in a head to head you would have to have drivers with exactly the same reactions, which i would say ain't possible.
The rollers wouldn't really tell you anything except 10bhp diff.
I suppose it's a job for that big lug Clarkson LOL

 

[MarkCup]

The rollers wouldn't really tell you anything except 10bhp diff.

When a load of us went to Janspeed recently, only 1 182/Trophy recorded higher ATW figures than 3 of the 172's that were there.

I think the extra 10bhp is a bit of marketing, nothing else - either the orignal 172's had nearer 180bhp, or the current 182's only have around 170bhp - why else would they all record almost exactly the same results :S

To answer original question...quicker? On road or track? If the driver is quicker the car will be too.

 

[Nat8701]

full fat 172 is that a 172 without the cup or with??

 

[oneeighttwo]

Welcome to CS I noticed its your first post!! this has been done to death but just so you know 182 is 10,000 times faster then a 172, the williams is quicker then both of them put together and the 172 cup is the quickest car on the planet LOL

 

[gazcaddy]

Some magazines have got slightly quicker 0-60 and 0-100 times for the 182 than the 172. Somepeople on here claim the 172 cup is faster than the 172 due to the higher power to weight ratio and on that basis so should the 182 (10bhp more and slightly lighter)

In reality though I would think there is nothing in it between any of the Renaultsport Clios

PS Welcome to Cliosport

 

[Rich]

Welcome to CS.

You looking into buying a 172 or 182?

 

[ShaunG]

the 182 has got a different exhaust manifold on it. thats about it. it would be better getting a 172 and swapping the manifold over. de-catting it and a bit of welding.

 

[Ian_182]

You can only go by the pro drivers in mags and as many believe on here they are open to suggestions about new models and can be biased...
IMHO when i went for a 182 and sold my silver 172 i was getting an artic full fat with all the spoiler packs and anthracite wheels.
I went for the look and the fact it may handle a little better than my outgong 172
Plus the resale of the 182 ff would be easier to get rid of when i wanted to change as it was the "newer" model
There is virtually nothing in it tbh,but its your choice and it was mine at the time

ian

 

[cosworth]

I went for a 182 for a newer low mileage car with a nicer exhaust

No matter what arguements are presented a 182 owner will always feel superior to a 172 owner. Its like saying I have a 8" penis over a 7" penis. Both provide the same satisfaction to a woman, however....

 

[lawrence]

another vs thread, pointless comparing pretty much the same car isnt it, its torque thats your pulling power not bhp, i havent seen 1 182 that has beaten or been left behind by a 172FF, cups are a different story

 

[MRBILLYUK]

10bhp is f*ck all . I've had a ff 172 , now got a ff 182 with both cup packs . The 182 handles better but the 172 was quicker , probably due to the fact that the 172 had 47k on the clock , my 182 has done just over 1k , can't wait for it to loosen up a bit .

 

[cosworth]

another vs thread, pointless comparing pretty much the same car isnt it, its torque thats your pulling power not bhp, i havent seen 1 182 that has beaten or been left behind by a 172FF, cups are a different story

Yep, all a marketing excercise, doesnt't make a whole lot of difference in the real world. I'd still rather say I had a 182 then a 172 however :rasp:

 

[MRBILLYUK]

^^^^ Snob , lol ^^^^

 

[MRBILLYUK]

Bhp aint everything anyway . The new mk3 has 197bhp and it has a lower top end . Power to weight ratio is where it counts and good handling .

 

[cosworth]

^^^^ Snob , lol ^^^^

Yep, image equals all

Cummon, we've all been sparring figures for years, now we can buy a car with figures in its title!

Eg -

Yeah mate, you may have 10bhp but you will only gain 0.001 secs a lap...

Yeah, but your's only just broken in and my 172 engine is virtually blue print, so based on the 9.765644% recurring potential power loss you 182 suffers from an inaccurate engine block moulding.... etc etc.

Yeah, but its a 182! Which is ten more then a 172! And I'll shut up when they produce a 192! :evil:

 

[lawrence]

Yep, all a marketing excercise, doesnt't make a whole lot of difference in the real world. I'd still rather say I had a 182 then a 172 however :rasp:

the only difference i can see between the 182 and 172 is the wheel barrow exhausts, otherwise near identical cars apart from the pants wheels renault put on both models

 

[cosworth]

You are forgetting the ten difference! Ten!!!

 

[lawrence]

rr it mate, you will be shocked, all the rr days ive been to, almost every 172 that has gone on the rollers has had a result of 180bhp+ most of the 182s have had er 170-179bhp

 

[kully]

now now girls :nono: they r both really close ...........handbags at 10bhp spaces plz . down to the driver , plus some cars run better than others so unfair testing there m8 .

 

[cosworth]

I dont care if a 172 spanks a 182's arse and call's it a b**ch. Chicks will always dig a "182" over a "172". Like chicks will dig a DB9 over a DB7. I really don't care if a 172 will show a 182 a clean pair of heals on a track. I'm just seeing how many 172 owners have inadequacy problems and can be wound up purely on numbers.

I love posts on cars vs. They really bring out the classics....

 

[kully]

i bought my 172 cup just as the 182 was released , preferred the 172 really , as performance goes ..............:slap: cup is better , then u can say the v6 is the tru daddy though .

 

[lawrence]

your missing something............i dont own either cars!

 

[kully]

your missing something............i dont own either cars!

only cos the dark side has wooooed u :quiet:

 

[lawrence]

I dont care if a 172 spanks a 182's arse and call's it a b*tch. Chicks will always dig a "182" over a "172". Like chicks will dig a DB9 over a DB7. I really don't care if a 172 will show a 182 a clean pair of heals on a track. I'm just seeing how many 172 owners have inadequacy problems and can be wound up purely on numbers.

I love posts on cars vs. They really bring out the classics....

i dont get wound up easy i just like people to put their money where their mouth is, "chicks" will "dig" a 182 over a 172, same car last time i checked, inadequacy lol thats why you got the 182 so "chicks" would "dig" you more, need a car to boost the confidence,

 

[lawrence]

only cos the dark side has wooooed u :quiet:

dark side, for poofs, lookng for a proper car mate, not a french tin box

 

[kully]

dark side, for poofs, lookng for a proper car mate, not a french tin box

cool......................lol , very inadequate now :quiet: :rasp: .
jap car then ?????????????

 

[lawrence]

now now girls :nono: they r both really close ...........handbags at 10bhp spaces plz . down to the driver , plus some cars run better than others so unfair testing there m8 .

that was my point in the first place a pointless thread coz the are both the same/similar in speed, performance, looks etc etc etc

 

[kully]

some ppl just light the fuse , walk away and watch the carnage thereafter

LOL:argue: :argue:

 

[Ali]

mine rr'd at 171 bhp and my mate 182 at 178 so make what you want of it. The 172 are nicer! No silly exhausts and much better colours. Monaco and frame red! The 2 best colours.

 

[gazcaddy]

When rolling roaded there are always going to be slight difference, especially due to mileage as well. In reality though the average 182 will have 10bhp more than the 172.

The 182 IMO looks better, (i prefer the wheels and the twin exhaust) and ive been told it handles better but I havent been on a track in it and unless you do then you wont notice much difference.

 

[Ali]

When rolling roaded there are always going to be slight difference, especially due to mileage as well. In reality though the average 182 will have 10bhp more than the 172.

The 182 IMO looks better, (i prefer the wheels and the twin exhaust) and ive been told it handles better but I havent been on a track in it and unless you do then you wont notice much difference.

Dream on!!! i've NEVER seen a std 182 run it's proposed book bhp.

The 182 has Wider tyres which help. And handling is 75% down to the driver, the application of your feet work, and putting the car in the rite place on the track.

 

[Englebert]

But like for the like the 182 is quicker in every department. End of.

 

[tameracingdriver]

^ Clutching at straws...

As usual, Renault says the 182 has more power, I believe them. They made the car after all. End of story.