same pace as a standard golf r32 3.2 v6! Golf cost double on tax and is 1000X times worse on fuel
They are. Fact.
I won't listen to your view. if your mini that is 'terrible' on fuel, but is still 'fast better' than your 197 was, something wasn't right with your 197. And if it was nowhere near as quick.
Lol... 70-75 on cruise control funnily.
But you dug out a 5 year old mpg thread.When I was looking for a 197 I never once thought 'umm, I wonder what this will do to the gallon?'
It's the Mpg to performance ratio that hurts most... I owned a Megane 225 after the 197 and it was significantly better on fuel, and a fair bit faster.
Having owned several different cars since 2013, I would like to revise my statement that clio 200’s are good on fuel. My megane 250 was much better and my M3 is only slightly worse but with double the power
No, you're missing my point, everyone assumes the GP has terrible mpg (it doesnt btw, im getting 34), but it is considerably better than the 28-29 i got from the 197. It would also rip a 197 a new ar5ehole. The difference is, whilst the R32/M3 justified their sub 30 mpg by being quick (the M3 especially), a 197/200 simply dont.
3 weeks mine lasted lol, massive shame, i wanted to love it.
At least it's to someone who's still in the club ?And I've just realised that I quoted a post from 5 yrs ago - fool
Liked yours then?
And I've just realised that I quoted a post from 5 yrs ago - fool