mk4 golf gttdi180
now u say it an mme
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.
clio 1.6 16v or a saxo vts
- Thread starter christian rea
- Start date
Shed.
time for a new car and im owed some dollar by my dad who is a lhd car dealer so to release my money tied up in his buisness he said i can have 1 of these cars cheap i curerently own a clio 1.2 but want to now the better car out of the saxo vts or clio 1.6 phs2 mk2 i now youll most say clio because u dislike the saxos but its always gd to have a change
what i want to no is whats the difference? can anyone help eg bhp speeds maintenance etc
tbh. if you like driving a piece of s**t which goes like the clappers then go for the vts. Just be sure your happy with driving one of the poorest built cars which exist.
If you want something fun and somehitng with a little more luxury then get the clio.
Citoren are s**t.
Clio 182 & Saxo VTR
Its certainly helps, look at the crease in the roof, with a roll cage you wouldnt have that and this would thus encourage the front to absorb more of the impact and thus routing energy away from the cabin. The results of the NCAP also showed it was the side and drivers front that was the weak points, the passenger front is reasonably good. So thats how it would help save you in a front end crash, and a side and roll for that matter.
Clio 182 & Saxo VTR
time for a new car and im owed some dollar by my dad who is a lhd car dealer so to release my money tied up in his buisness he said i can have 1 of these cars cheap i curerently own a clio 1.2 but want to now the better car out of the saxo vts or clio 1.6 phs2 mk2 i now youll most say clio because u dislike the saxos but its always gd to have a change
what i want to no is whats the difference? can anyone help eg bhp speeds maintenance etc
tbh. if you like driving a piece of s**t which goes like the clappers then go for the vts. Just be sure your happy with driving one of the poorest built cars which exist.
If you want something fun and somehitng with a little more luxury then get the clio.
Citoren are s**t.
I bet you have never driven one, no nothing about them, and are easly influenced into believing what anyone tells you about cars and take it as gospel. "Hmmm novas seem to be slated, ill jump on that bandwagon".
M
mini-valver
I've driven VTS's and hated the feeling of being inside someting so fragile. They go well and handle brilliantly but TBH are'nt massively different to the Clio.
They are faster than VTR's, same pace as ST170's and not a great deal behind a VTS (3-4 car lengths form 30-80.
For me, I'd take the Clio, purely on spec and safety levels compared. If you want something fast and nimble and insurance is'nt a problem, Buy a cup.
They are faster than VTR's, same pace as ST170's and not a great deal behind a VTS (3-4 car lengths form 30-80.
For me, I'd take the Clio, purely on spec and safety levels compared. If you want something fast and nimble and insurance is'nt a problem, Buy a cup.
as said it all depends what your after,imo the clio 1.6 isnt a hot hatch and doesnt really compare to the vts.
After getting used to the cramped pedals the saxo is a fun car to drive and you get lots of feedback.
As for the clio being as quick as an st170 lol,what a load of b****cks
After getting used to the cramped pedals the saxo is a fun car to drive and you get lots of feedback.
As for the clio being as quick as an st170 lol,what a load of b****cks
Shed.
actually i have, once. and yes. it was a piece of s**t. but it went like a bloody rocket. All saxos are s**t. fact. end of.
kthanksbye.
oh and the gearbox is like cardboard.
Shed.
i will kill you all.
porsche 944 - 80's ftw!
Well my vts is standard and has similar miles/condition to my old cup.
The first thing i did notice is the handling, not as much grip as my cup and doesnt feel as stable changing direction quickly. A lot more lean in the bends but may just need new dampers/springs?
Perhaps lowering it slightly might bring it a bit nearer to the cups excellent handling.
Power wise, i knew it would be slower and doesnt have that "kick" around 5k like the cup but to be honest im pretty pleased with it.
In a straight line i cant see there being an awful lot in it till later on in the gears (im guessing after 3rd) when the cups outright power will push it in front.
I really like the vts, there isnt much to beat it for the money you can get them for now.
time for a new car and im owed some dollar by my dad who is a lhd car dealer so to release my money tied up in his buisness he said i can have 1 of these cars cheap i curerently own a clio 1.2 but want to now the better car out of the saxo vts or clio 1.6 phs2 mk2 i now youll most say clio because u dislike the saxos but its always gd to have a change
what i want to no is whats the difference? can anyone help eg bhp speeds maintenance etc
tbh. if you like driving a piece of s**t which goes like the clappers then go for the vts. Just be sure your happy with driving one of the poorest built cars which exist.
If you want something fun and somehitng with a little more luxury then get the clio.
Citoren are s**t.
Blah,blah,blah, build quality, blah,blah,blah, build quality.
Lmfao!
No one for thrill a minute old school hot hatchbacks then mate ??
You stick to the luxury of the Clio sweet pea! :clown:
lol those of you who say saxos are unreliable perhaps need to learn how to service and maintain a car. Over my 3 saxos i've done 160K of trouble free motoring.
The pedals are arkward untill you are used to them and the gearboxes can be stiff but only when cold. Once warm its smooth as can be
In fact my gearbox takes daily stick up to the 7k rev limit with out breaking at all. (I make a commute of 85-100 miles daily)
The base model clios in my eyes are no better than any other french car. Cheap, affordable,basic and wacked together as quick as possible. At the end of the day what do you expect for 3-4 grand.
The only reason i want a Clio Sport is for the interior and the way it looks. The driving fun factor isnt much different to my VTS and i've spent alot of time in Valvers and my mates 172 which is now turbo'd (Stevo172-RWD)
The pedals are arkward untill you are used to them and the gearboxes can be stiff but only when cold. Once warm its smooth as can be
In fact my gearbox takes daily stick up to the 7k rev limit with out breaking at all. (I make a commute of 85-100 miles daily)
The base model clios in my eyes are no better than any other french car. Cheap, affordable,basic and wacked together as quick as possible. At the end of the day what do you expect for 3-4 grand.
The only reason i want a Clio Sport is for the interior and the way it looks. The driving fun factor isnt much different to my VTS and i've spent alot of time in Valvers and my mates 172 which is now turbo'd (Stevo172-RWD)
clio 172
i thought they were egsacly the same but if it was a straight choice between clio 1.6 or saxo vts i would have the vts :approve:
M
mini-valver
Blat from 60ish to 130, nothing, yes NOTHING in it. Dual carriageway simulation of course......
clio 172
what is all this a bout a vts being quicker than a 106 gti cause i have always thort they are the same but saying that some 1 i no owns a gti and he said he drove his mates vts and it felt much quicker but still they are egsacly the same arnt they?^^^^ as above
M
mini-valver
He meant than the Clio mate. They are the same car, if anything, the VTS would be quicker due to lack of leather.....In theory.
Your Clio isn't exaclty standard though is it?
I will admit the st170's don't exactly set the world on fire, i ve had a few in my car.
I have a soft spot for renaults (my first car was a 1.2 clio) and plan to upgrade to a 182 early next year but the interior on my VTS is much more comfortable than the Clio.
It all depends what you want from a car really ..... all i can say is the VTS is a very surprising car in terms of performance and you dont really understand this untill you've driven one. It really does put a smile of my face, especially on the recent cold morning commutes to work!
I was unsure what to get after my last VTR and didnt think a VTS with its 20bhp & 8 xtra valves would be much different ..... how wrong i was!
As said above you cant compare the two as they are so different .... performance wise you should be talking VTR and Clio 1.6 16v.
Just so you get some idea of costs i get 260 miles to a full tank and that costs roughly £36
Tax is also currently £112.50 for 6 months
The best thing you can do is try them both.
------------------------------------------------
Also as for reliability i do 500+miles a week and have covered 23k since last october ...... its started first time every time and the only problem i've had is a worn ball joint.[/QUOTE]
I couldnt agree more. I have had a VTR then moved to a VTS. I didn't think there would be much difference, until i drove one. They are really fun little cars. But they can catch you out, defo in the wet!!! The built quality is also suspect, but they are old cars.
Had a few problems with mine, but nothing major really, battery, clutch and as above, a ball joint.
But as been said before in this post, try them out first to see what you like!
It all depends what you want from a car really ..... all i can say is the VTS is a very surprising car in terms of performance and you dont really understand this untill you've driven one. It really does put a smile of my face, especially on the recent cold morning commutes to work!
I was unsure what to get after my last VTR and didnt think a VTS with its 20bhp & 8 xtra valves would be much different ..... how wrong i was!
As said above you cant compare the two as they are so different .... performance wise you should be talking VTR and Clio 1.6 16v.
Just so you get some idea of costs i get 260 miles to a full tank and that costs roughly £36
Tax is also currently £112.50 for 6 months
The best thing you can do is try them both.
------------------------------------------------
Also as for reliability i do 500+miles a week and have covered 23k since last october ...... its started first time every time and the only problem i've had is a worn ball joint.[/QUOTE]
I couldnt agree more. I have had a VTR then moved to a VTS. I didn't think there would be much difference, until i drove one. They are really fun little cars. But they can catch you out, defo in the wet!!! The built quality is also suspect, but they are old cars.
Had a few problems with mine, but nothing major really, battery, clutch and as above, a ball joint.
But as been said before in this post, try them out first to see what you like!
incorrect they are the same weight
i know what i would have
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auW9ZpkOiMc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-9vAJb_-Zo
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=auW9ZpkOiMc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I-9vAJb_-Zo
Incorrect to you too! :rasp:
I had it the wrong way round the VTS is supposed to be lighter and by 15Kg. As said this is most likely due to the leather!
Wisebuyer = Saxo VTS 935kg 106 Gti = 950Kg
Parkers = Saxo VTS 935Kg 106 Gti = 950Kg
aside from what they say many owners have weighed both cars and they come out the same.They are the same car
LMAO as if owners have actually weighed their cars.
I've been around on the Saxo forums for 4 or so years and never heard of that before!
They have loads of differences …. The bonnet, boot, wing mirrors, wheels, head lights, interior plastic and materials.
All the small differences in weight and size soon add up and I cant see a 15kg variance being so far from the truth.
The new Mini Cooper S has the same engine as the 207 Gti ..... this doesn't mean they're the same weight.
I've been around on the Saxo forums for 4 or so years and never heard of that before!
They have loads of differences …. The bonnet, boot, wing mirrors, wheels, head lights, interior plastic and materials.
All the small differences in weight and size soon add up and I cant see a 15kg variance being so far from the truth.
The new Mini Cooper S has the same engine as the 207 Gti ..... this doesn't mean they're the same weight.
have any idea how many owners in particular on the rallye register weigh there cars ? loads. As for comparing the 207 and a mini they share the engine and thats about it.Saxo and pug share engine,chassis,gearbox,brakes,suspension etc
Former R27 & Mk1 V6 owner
The VTS is miles faster, handles better and will make you grin everytime you drive it. The Clio *might* be a bit better built, and will have a nicer interior - but unless you're like 40 who cares ?
I'd have the Saxo given the choice between the two.
15kg isn't a different you'd ever notice. That's the difference between fat or not. Or a full tank of motionlotion. The 106 would be my choice over the Saxo - purely because I think they look nicer and have a nicer inside - but that's just a personal preference. Some people reckon they have different gearing as well - but no one can ever confirm it. The theory been the Saxo hits 60mph in 2nd gear, but sacrifices midrange, and the 106 needs 3rd and has a bit more midrange.
Dan
?I'd have the Saxo given the choice between the two.
15kg isn't a different you'd ever notice. That's the difference between fat or not. Or a full tank of motionlotion. The 106 would be my choice over the Saxo - purely because I think they look nicer and have a nicer inside - but that's just a personal preference. Some people reckon they have different gearing as well - but no one can ever confirm it. The theory been the Saxo hits 60mph in 2nd gear, but sacrifices midrange, and the 106 needs 3rd and has a bit more midrange.
Dan
No matter what you say there are quite a few differences and this will result in a change in weight ..... my point is that 15kg isn't unrealistic!
I still cant see why people on Ralle register would compare are Pugs standard weight to a VTS
Agreed. There class. Well i think so anyway!!
M
mini-valver
LOL at the people who were obviously there. Stat boy are we??
A few breathing mods when I came up against it. I was'nt faster nor was he upto 100.
Former R27 & Mk1 V6 owner
I hope no one here is confusing the St170 with a performance car hehe.
Look at the figures, a Saxo VTS would give one a damn good run. A Clio 1.6, hmmm, I'm less confident. Mind you, I had a 206 XSi 1.6 16v - always seemed quicker than my mates Dynamique (I think that's the right model?) so maybe I just have a bad view on the Clio.
Dan
Look at the figures, a Saxo VTS would give one a damn good run. A Clio 1.6, hmmm, I'm less confident. Mind you, I had a 206 XSi 1.6 16v - always seemed quicker than my mates Dynamique (I think that's the right model?) so maybe I just have a bad view on the Clio.
Dan
