All 172 Owners

[SAX_MAN]

Im thinking of taking the jump and buying a 172 but what i want to know is, what have standard 172s got on rolling roads???

I hear there are bad and good 172s about?

I dont want to buy a new 172 that doesnt perform as it should.

 

[telford_mike]

145 - 150 is about right (at the wheels) for a standard car.

 

[aaronc]

Unfortunately its very difficult to tell a good from bad 172 and YES they are around. I suppose the only thing to do, is ask to test drive for a day, and get it RRd!

 

[Bryan]

the 172 has 172PS which equates to around 158 bhp

 

[172Cup]

you mean 168 BHP!!

 

[paddymph]

152 @ Wheels according to RE in Bury

 

[Bryan]

right actual figures should be 163.6 bhp



oh, the cups have 2 or 3 more bhp, dont know why though, think its something to do with the extra luxury items the 172 has over the cup

 

[Turkish]

as the nike slogan goes "just do it" you know you want to

 

[Turkish]

Quote: Originally posted by bambam on 19 June 2003


right actual figures should be 163.6 bhp



oh, the cups have 2 or 3 more bhp, dont know why though, think its something to do with the extra luxury items the 172 has over the cup

probably a slight drain from the pulley for the a/c compressor

 

[viceroy]

Yeah, do it.

 

[philip]

pre unichip and at 31 deg temp, car was at 139 ATW = 165bhp ATF (with IK + exhaust)

post unichip 152 ATW, 174.5 ATF again at 31 deg (4k miles on the car)

i.e you need to spend £500 or so to really get the bhp that Renault claimed you were buying with the car.

get yourself a discount of more than £500 (easy you can get up to £2k off) and call it quits.

 

[Bryan]

to my knowledge, renault have marketed the 172 very well, and without saying it has 172bhp people have automatically assumed it does,

if you read the spec it does say the power figured in PS

 

[telford_mike]

Its probably the same for all cars. Bhp at the flywheel is totally meaningless anyway.

 

[Hartge Bob]

PS = PferdeStarke (german translation for horsepower)

1 PS = 0.983 bhp

So 172 PS = 169.65 bhp

for a good explanation of power and torque try http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/power1.htmhttp://www.pumaracing.co.uk/power1.htm

 

[telford_mike]

Thats a good site - according to this page http://www.pumaracing.co.uk/trans.htmhttp://www.pumaracing.co.uk/trans.htm a standard 172 should make 144.8bhp at the wheels. Most of them do!

 

[Jonathan]

Bam Bam, I aint saying it counts for anything, I aint saying mine has got it but the literature for the MK1 172 says 172 BHP several times on it ! So I think you can say it was marketed as having that output !

 

[teady172]

Look at the website and the brochures Renault quote 172BHP all over the place!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[philip]

well lets put it this way. did anybody buy a new "172", put in on the rollers when still newish (less than 5k) and in standard trim, and got anywhere near 172 bhp or more accurately anywhere near 148-150 at the wheels?

If not, Renault should consider changing the badging ...

 

[paddymph]

last RR we went to the Cup actually made LESS than mine, so i reckon thats bollox re a cup giving higher figures.

 

[SAX_MAN]

this is what puts me off the Clio 172, i dont trust Renault.

 

[paddymph]

seriously mate (feck! Forgot ur name again), its touch and go if u get a good one! Ask Rhys, his new one is an absolute flier

 

[SAX_MAN]

Type R is a safer bet then

 

[paddymph]

is it feck, u get a good 172 and youll be cooler i cant explain this good and bad thing, just that some seem WAY quicker than others? Ask Reno....... then again, theyre all nobs

 

[cerbera4.5]

get a mk1 172,most of those are around the 170 bhp mark,also the more miles put on the car the better,,if new only produces say 158 bhp after 15k it will be nearer the 170 mark.

hence y my mk1 172 with 17500 miles is a monster!!

i heard they dyno tested all the new engines and put the ones that came out on or around 170 bhp into the cups the norm 172 gets the dregs..could be b****cks could be true.

 

[paddymph]

UTTER BOLLOX that, got to be, imagine the costs involved in doing that!?

 

[viceroy]

yeah the mk1 do seem to be pretty quick if a little less refined.

Where I live (high altitude, poor fuel) the quoted time 0-60 for a mk1 172 is 8.4s and with a stopwatch I managed a 7.8s