he very well maybe mitchy but thats his problem not mine. also the figures i have checked for the 60-100 times of both cars is the wrx is 1.5 sec slower. if anybody got the figures for 30-100 please post them. i would like to see them also.
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.
he very well maybe mitchy but thats his problem not mine. also the figures i have checked for the 60-100 times of both cars is the wrx is 1.5 sec slower. if anybody got the figures for 30-100 please post them. i would like to see them also.
Its seeing threads like these when I wonder why our local (Castle Combe) championship has no Clios running in it. Plenty of 205s as is to be expected, then an Impreza, Focus RS, A4, Mini Cooper S, Civic Type R, Astras, Corsas etc etc etc, but no Clio of any description. Considering the relatively low cost of a 172/182 Cup its odd that nobody races them here.
Admittedly the Clio 172/182 would end up in Class A (1800-3000cc) but Im sure a well put together model would be reasonably competitive. A work colleague of mines Husband holds the class B track record in a 205, less than a tenth of a second slower than the Class A record, and all that on a budget of next to nothing.
Remapped derv Golf
Caught a badly looked after UK Scooby (quite old car) off boost on a hill and left him quite a bit behind.
Although he mad not have been ready and the Cup was on-cam at the time!
Unless it was a Sport with the scoop.
From what Ive read the early UK cars are nothing special. Im pretty confident there arent many Scoobys (import or UK) an RS Clio would be able to beat.
What figures and where from?
Perhaps the bugeye, but not the newage or old classic models. The stats from Evo and autocar have already been posted in this thread.
The wrx is not slower at all, not from any speed! theyre very close but the scoob edges it.
Its been said a thousand times, its down to the doughnut behind the wheel
Remapped derv Golf
Arent the early uk cars around 210? This one was nothing special, just a very dirty white uk version (M reg i think)
Proberbly a Sport........HUF!
so that makes either my car more powerful than it is. or his car is f**ked.
Come on guys you are ruining the thread. Stay on topic or start a new thread in other marques about STis and the like.
If you have an STI go to a track day and play with some cars that cost similar money - VX220 Turbos and the like. We all know why you wont do that and why you prefer to hang around with 13k shopping trolleys instead.... If you are into tuning then go play with my mate that has a poxy 1.3 Suzuki Swift - with a supercharger...
To get back on topic, as many real world tests have proved there is nothing in it between a standard WRX and a standard 182 aside from £7k. End of.
Yeah but they are a lot lighter than todays versions.
Theyre probably around the same performance 210 of yesterday vs 225 of today due to the extra weight.
Once rolling 4wd transmission losses dont help its mid range hence why a clio will stick to it. Mod them though and a clio is a small object in the mirror. I remember an encounter with a 172. Its not worth mentioning
the lower spec uk models were about 210bhp i think, but the trouble is when someone says they could beat a scooby they seem to think that classes all scoobs!!
a standard clio 182 would indeed give a uk spec 210bhp model a run for its money.
but a p1, type r, type ra, type c, 22B would be long gone, and as for cornering.... the type r had an adjustable diff meaning you could use it to great advantage round the twisties.
toypop that is my point. nothing in it @ all. so everyone back on topic. 182 vs wrx and not wrx sti spec c. ok this is little of topic. mate has just got a 380bhp engine from a mate of his and just put the figures into http://www.letstorquebhp.com/http://www.letstorquebhp.com/ and its coming up with some stupid quick times.
380bhp
800kg
fwd
is this program anygood?
Clio 182
Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 29 March 2005
Quote: Originally posted by Dan_mk1 on 29 March 2005Look in EVO
182 is 100 in 16 IIRC
The WRX is 17 IIRC
Race him from 10-100! Ask him if he likes the look of your arse, lol[/QUOTE]LOL at these stats.Clio 182.............. 6.6 and 17.5 (10.9... 60-100)Impreza WRX.......5.5 and 15.7 (10.2...60-100)16 secs to 100 LOL (maybe on your speedo
) Off the line the WRX will beat you, on the move with the correct driver it will slightly edge ahead.Get a numbnuts driving and you may well be the 1 in front. Mid range there aint nothing in it until well over 100mph I dont drive a 182. And I knew the stats were out hence the IIRC. All hail Mitchy!
just because you go past something, it doesnt mean you have a quicker car
although i did overtake a ferarri once
i think what every non 172/182 driver is forgeting here is that the clio is by far the fastest car in the world!!!
i own a 172 an yes they are quick to 60 because of there weight, over the legal limit tho an things like subarus an LCRs an FRSs pull away. once in 3rd gear the 70kg or woteva difference doesnt really matter, its torque an bhp.
Quote: Originally posted by TB11 on 29 March 2005Quote: Originally posted by Neil82cup on 29 March 2005 Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 29 March 2005 I recall you sayingthere is no difference between a 182 and an Sti 30-100.An sti does 100 in a tad over 12 secs! Your car at best does it in 17secs.I think thats a hell of a gap in performance! Your mates a gimp if he cant leave your 182. Nothing to do with the car!<FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #407db6">Not unless hes exaggerating his power output?
Id love a wee play with the new age STi 30-100
Help yourself will make you look small and pathetic in the rear view mirror (and i dont have to remove everything from my car do do so )[/QUOTE][Edited by TB11 on 29 March 2005 at 6:59pm]
Find me a standard STi new style and ill push it up the road 30-100.
2005 Impreza WRX STI
in my track experience, i think cars between 120bhp-230 theres not much in it all to 100. only after this the turbos and higher bhp/torque cars come to life.
Ive had a wrx and an sti8 and will be picking up 182 cup on Friday. Sti is different kettle of fish to wrx and 182. I cant see a 182 going past a wrx on the straight, on the twisties however maybe closer coz wrxs do understeer when pushed if the geometry isnt sorted, imho. Sti v182 dont even think about it.
MarkCup
ClioSport Club Member
If thats the case Mitchy - whats your take on why these threads always descend into another round of perpetually spouting stats from here there and everywhere...which do mean absolutely f*** all in the real world, with real drivers behind the wheel.Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 29 March 2005
Its been said a thousand times, its down to the doughnut behind the wheel
Is a tuned Jap-turbo-barge quicker than a 172/182 in a straight line? Very probably..who cares...move on.
Wheres my anorak...anyone...?
Astra VXR 17/05/07
I have had a play with a WRX (225) on a private road,starting from 40mph upto about 110 mph.i was behind to start with and it stayed that way.The WRX did not pull away from me at all.
So from my own experience,from 40-110 there is sod all in it.
However,the look on the WRX drivers face would of been priceless
ChrisR
ClioSport Club Member
I have a mk1 172 so not quite a 182, the stepdad is just getting rid of an 03 plate WRX.
To 60 the scooby pisses on the clio, well I say pisses got one of those gtech things and on the same bit of road with same driver the wrx was on average 1.5secs quicker.
Also pulls a lot better top end imho but thats probably due mroe to the gearing. On the way up to the motorshow last year foot planted in fifth and the needle just kept going, backed off when the speedo hit 150 indicated as road was quite busy (private road thogh obvously
).The 172 seems to tail off a lot sooner than that.
Great thing about the Impreza though is in most gears you plant your foot and away it pulls, the 172 is a bit more picky.
A mate has gone form a 280bhp RB5 to a DC5 teg type R and he hates the teg now, says everytime you want to boot it theres too much planning involved, he liked just being able to floor it and go
MarkCup
ClioSport Club Member
LOL ^^^ thats just lazy.
NAs are rewarding
Quote: Originally posted by Evoo on 29 March 2005
Great thing about the Impreza though is in most gears you plant your foot and away it pulls, the 172 is a bit more picky.
A mate has gone form a 280bhp RB5 to a DC5 teg type R and he hates the teg now, says everytime you want to boot it theres too much planning involved, he liked just being able to floor it and go
mmmm torque!
demonstrated http://freespace.virgin.net/steve.bower1/frsvs182.wmvhere same bhp/tonne but the turbo pulls the car away, but by my own admission dave182 would prob have been faster to the 60mph mark.
Can someone tell me where all these private tracks arehttp://i2.photobucket.com/albums/y19/Brazoo/whistle.gif
first post but i like abit of scooby eating banter......
my m8 has a clio cup 172 - various mods, cams, inlet manifold, renault sports ECU which needs mapping, decat and filter.......had 188hp and 167ft/lbs last rolling road but hes having ported/polished head soon and the remap as graphs all over the shop at the mo. (should be over 200hp hopefully when done).
It is a fast lil motor already.......raced a few UK spec scoobies and faired pretty well infact faster than some, even passed a skyline R33 GTS.
but when it comes to STIs (especially type Rs- no chance!! lol) its alot harder.
another friend of mine has a remapped cupra R - (jamsport remapped 270bhp/272ft/lbs) and is it marginally faster than the cup upto around 100 which is good considering the 80 odd hp difference! Standard the clio pulled away by 4-5 car lengths by 80.
I had a 355hp pulsar until late last year and although I blew the clio on the straights, around bends and on a track it was a lot closer.......I do respect these lil cars, so much I may be persuaded to buy one, come on 30 plus to a gallon V scoobies(mates sti type r does 18-19ish lol) and 7.5K to buy!!!!
plus you need to hammer the little clio cup to get the most out of it......a scooby will have its power all in the mid range so an easier car to drive fast.
My car is standardQuote: Originally posted by Neil82cup on 29 March 2005
Quote: Originally posted by TB11 on 29 March 2005
Quote: Originally posted by Neil82cup on 29 March 2005
Id love a wee play with the new age STi 30-100
Help yourself
will make you look small and pathetic in the rear view mirror (and i dont have to remove everything from my car do do so
[Edited by TB11 on 29 March 2005 at 6:59pm]
Find me a standard STi new style and ill push it up the road 30-100.
There are no exhaust mods except for a like for like back box and an STi panel filter, it is running standard boost on the original ecu, standard tyres and brakes, what more do you want
Oh and capable of 0-100 in about 11.5 so 30-100 wont make much difference
Tony
Nippy white cup
lol Of course he did say standard STI tho....
Chris
Dirty E91
Think this conversation has gone awry from the original post ^^^^
Think its common knowledge that the standard WRX is no longer the every- mans performance car champion anymore, your standard hot hatch now has circa 200 BHP which gives similar timed figures and real world performance to the WRX.
IF you gonna start comparing it to jap WRXs, type Rs and the like you might as well include MB C32s, M3s and older TVRs and the like which I dont think was the orginal intention, the guy just wanted some confirmation on his thoughts.
Just my thoughts.
Similar threads
