ClioSport.net
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.
You say that, in your opinion, you dont get 85% of the torque from 2k revs, and then you say exactly....
Im confused!
From the brochure.... "...Maximum torque of 200Nm is achieved at 5250rpm, but 80% of that maximum is available from 2000rpm, giving flexibility you will appreciate whether on the open road or driving round town..."
Quote: Originally posted by Mrdemon on 23 January 2005
<SCRIPT language=javascript>
he has a golf poor motion and he sl*gs off the 182 lol
what a dreamer.
I feel a race coming on
If he has sl*gged it off then surely so have i, I have had my 182 for 7k miles now and im sure i am in a good position to judge.
he has not sl*gged off the 182, he has given us his opinion as he found it after his test drive.
Right this is how it goes in plain simple english.
1.8 16v valver and 172 get majority of there power at 5k ish rpm and are slow and sluggish below this.
2.0ltr Willy and 182 get majority of there power at 2.5k ish rpm and the remaining power at 5k ish rpm.
The 182 IS quicker below 5k rpm then the 172 Fact
Valver/172 you put your foot down and wait, and wait, and wait then 5k rpm comes and suddenly your off like a rocket.
Willy/182 you put your foot down and wahey your off straight away then when you think it cant get any better you hit 5k and your off again.
Now im not arguing with anyone, but i am going against the grain so most will seem to think i wanna row, but i am in a very good postion to comment on this subject.
All imo of course
Smokey
[Edited by Smokey on 23 January 2005 at 3:56pm]
Going on what I saw at santa pod today the 182s were getting slaughtered. One even got beat by a 2.0 8v nova LOLQuote: Originally posted by Mrdemon on 23 January 2005
<SCRIPT language=javascript>
he has a golf poor motion and he sl*gs off the 182 lol
what a dreamer.
I feel a race coming on
[Edited by big hp on 23 January 2005 at 5:33pm]
Oh the 182 got a 15.9 1/4 as well My Valver did a 15.5.
Quote: Originally posted by big hp on 23 January 2005
Quote: Originally posted by Mrdemon on 23 January 2005<SCRIPT language=javascript></SCRIPT> he has a golf poor motion and he sl*gs off the 182 lolwhat a dreamer.I feel a race coming on
[/QUOTE]Going on what I saw at santa pod today the 182s were getting slaughtered. One even got beat by a 2.0 8v nova LOLTimes?
Quote: Originally posted by big hp on 23 January 2005
Going on what I saw at santa pod today the 182s were getting slaughtered. One even got beat by a 2.0 8v nova LOLQuote: Originally posted by Mrdemon on 23 January 2005
<SCRIPT language=javascript>
he has a golf poor motion and he sl*gs off the 182 lol
what a dreamer.
I feel a race coming on
[Edited by big hp on 23 January 2005 at 5:33pm]
Oh the 182 got a 15.9 1/4 as well My Valver did a 15.5.
Must be bad driver fella, dont mean the cars slow.
15.9 is pathetic. The guy cant drive to save his life, plus I expect the surface is still very green after the winter. My old 172 could manage 14.9.
Not that it matters what we say as Big hp obviously hates the 182 and will rubbish it at practically every given opportunity. LOL
I think paddy did 14.6 or .7 didnt he?
No not intent on winding people up just saying there not all conquering as we are always being told. You dont see me bitching about the snide comments about my 4motion do you? I had a test drive didnt like it and shared my views. Maybe i should say my valver and 4motion are the best things since sliced bread and shout the odds.
http://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1106502369__AAAA0008.jpg
Quote: Originally posted by Lee on 23 January 2005
Just leave him to it, if it makes him feel happier about owning a 10 year old rust ridden shed then so be it.
I dont think he is trying to wind you up, he has just posted pics to prove what he saw.
But as i/Lee mentioned bad driver in this case.
I have a Valver Lee, 100% rust free
My rust ridden shed as you like to call it will beat your £12k 182
Quote: Originally posted by big hp on 23 January 2005
No not intent on winding people up just saying there not all conquering as we are always being told. You dont see me bitching about the snide comments about my 4motion do you? I had a test drive didnt like it and shared my views. Maybe i should say my valver and 4motion are the best things since sliced bread and shout the odds.
http://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1106502369__AAAA0008.jpg
Track looks well greasy
P
peterh2
Having driven a 172 for about 30k miles, then a valver for about 12k and now a 182 for 2k miles I decided I would give you my opinion this:
172 = this was my first sporty Renault and the valver defiantly felt a lot more fun when I changed from the 172 to the valver. Good all round car but although (probably marginally) faster than the valver but felt slower. Handling was not as predictable and didn’t feel quite as hardcore as the valver. I would defiantly prefer this car to the valver for a long driver however.
Valver = most driving fun of the lot. The sound (green induction kit on mine and exhaust) was awesome and as it was chipped to rev limit at 8k it was a real screamer. Driving position was best in this car, went round corners like it was on rails, very predictable and LOTS of fun. Did run out of puff after about 80 and had a big lack of torque.
182 = noticeably more induction noise than the 172 (both the 182 and 172 standard) and defiantly feels like it has more torque and seems to be getting faster and faster as it loosens up. Over 90 feels like it would be able to pull serious distance on the valver. Suspension / chassis is MUCH better setup than the 172 seems a lot more predictable in handling and seems to hang on for longer (this might be the Michelins / Conti Sport difference). Again valver felt more hardcore (probably mainly due to sound) and had a better driving position but unfortunately my valver was starting to need things fixing very regularly and I couldn’t afford to be without a car when it was getting fixed so needed something new with warranty. Defiantly a better all round car than a valver however I think a valver might feel more fun on a trackday.
All of this is just my opinion; none of it is fact.
Would love the opportunity to have a go in a Williams just for comparisons sake!
Quote: Originally posted by peterh2 on 23 January 2005
Having driven a 172 for about 30k miles, then a valver for about 12k and now a 182 for 2k miles I decided I would give you my opinion this:
172 = this was my first sporty Renault and the valver defiantly felt a lot more fun when I changed from the 172 to the valver. Good all round car but although (probably marginally) faster than the valver but felt slower. Handling was not as predictable and didn’t feel quite as hardcore as the valver. I would defiantly prefer this car to the valver for a long driver however.
Valver = most driving fun of the lot. The sound (green induction kit on mine and exhaust) was awesome and as it was chipped to rev limit at 8k it was a real screamer. Driving position was best in this car, went round corners like it was on rails, very predictable and LOTS of fun. Did run out of puff after about 80 and had a big lack of torque.
182 = noticeably more induction noise than the 172 (both the 182 and 172 standard) and defiantly feels like it has more torque and seems to be getting faster and faster as it loosens up. Over 90 feels like it would be able to pull serious distance on the valver. Suspension / chassis is MUCH better setup than the 172 seems a lot more predictable in handling and seems to hang on for longer (this might be the Michelins / Conti Sport difference). Again valver felt more hardcore (probably mainly due to sound) and had a better driving position but unfortunately my valver was starting to need things fixing very regularly and I couldn’t afford to be without a car when it was getting fixed so needed something new with warranty. Defiantly a better all round car than a valver however I think a valver might feel more fun on a trackday.
All of this is just my opinion; none of it is fact.
Would love the opportunity to have a go in a Williams just for comparisons sake!
You local to Cambridge mate, i will take you out in my Willified Valver
I think maybe this should be locked as it is going around in circles.
If I had test driven my 182 I wouldnt have bought it.
Now after only 2500 miles of running in its getting more and more eager and the power and torque is spreading further and further down the rev range everytime I drive it. I am also getting more comfortable with the car and getting better at exploiting it.
If you wonder why I never bothered having a test drive, to be honest I dont think you learn sh1t from a 20 minute drive in an unfamiliar car. Its also like trying on a new pair of shoes, they always feel terrible compared to your old ones - at first...
I have only test driven 1 of the 7 cars I have owned and guess what? Only one of them disappointed me and was sold after 6 months. Guess which one!
not really bothered if people think the clio 172 is poop. For me the grp16 insurance and 35-40mpg even when driving without economising is a real plus point, as are the seats which i mite add are only seconded to Volvos by now world famous "chairs". Even clarkson said ".. But it is, Amazingly comfortable.."
for what its worth i dont think a standard MKII172 is awesome around the tight corners i think it rolls too much and slides... however is that because people expect it to keep up with 4wd saloons ? well it cant but for the SuperMini catagory it was 2002 time the best handling supermini and shocked a few people as to how hardcore it was for a Clio not given 125hp like a Lupo or 135hp like the more expensive top of the range 1.7 Puma, but given 168hp. not bad, its no rocket in the wrong hands.
the 182, well thats got the power lower down more torque + bhp and weighs less as the 172 is very on/off but thats the bit my m8s and gf like .. accelarating fastish like a normal car and then lots of noise and a shove in the back, ive been doing this on the way to work for 1.5yrs and i cant seem to get bored of it... addictive kick.
I agree with the coment that no modern european car is crap. they all do what there meant to which is provide a-b transport, beyond that everything else is a luxury... people are just spoil for choice.
one final point.. cars seem to be getting faster or a least people are finding ways of making cars go faster for less.. i,e my bros remapped 192hp diesel skoda does 0-60 in just under 7secs !!! and 30-70 in under 6.0 ! faster upto 110 than my 172 and grips better too... but its just smooth and the needle rises, no action no noise and i hope hes not listening but no fun IMO either.
im not going to continue, i think the 172 and 182 have had their day as far as design, interior and quality are concerned but for Fun and Price nothing can touch them and il bet the new RS models are faster better at cornering look really smart inside and everyone on here will jump to buy one, but if it aint fun im not gettin one.
--The End--
[Edited by cliotuRS on 23 January 2005 at 6:10pm]
