Clio 172 a bit under powered?

[Keydogg]

Hi this is my first post (i think, i registered a while ago!)

my girlfriend has just bought a gorgeous o2 reg Clio 172, i myself have a standard Saxo VTS.

now, when comparing the 2 cars, i thought there would be quite a bit of difference in performance, especially after about 80mph. but there isnt as much as i thought. while we were on a very quite dual carriageway, (section removed, it's highly illegal - Griff) she was about 5 car lengths ahead but it seemed as if she wasnt really pulling away, then we both eased off.

when i have been in her car it seems very quick, but to me hardly different to my VTS? the only time i really saw the difference was when we had 5 people in the car it still really picks up where as the saxo wouldn't.

i heard a b****cks rumour that some 172's where like 140bhp, but i never believed it ofcourse, because it just wouldn't happen.. but i wonder if there is anything im missing here?

i have used the search but havent found anything similar really!

 

[Keydogg]

ffs ive posted in the wrong area lol.

if a mod could move it to the correct area i would appreciate

 

[Griff]

Moved.

 

[Ali]

PMSL...Griff ignore my Report...

VTS arn't slow! And i've never heard of an RS bein under 160bhp!

 

[Revels]

Theres a thread on here from last week or so, 182/172 vs 106 GTi/Saxo VTS.

Most people on here will refuse to believe that its possible for them to keep up, but its do-able!

 

[Keydogg]

well i suppose that puts a bit of a smile on my face then!

i was just getting a bit paranoid and started thinking about things like "what if the engine is a 1.6 16v with a 20l plastic cover" and stuff lol, but then it has all the 172 equipment like the Xenons, Interior, it revs to 7500, etc etc.

Please excuse my ignorance

 

[benhwolves]

been covered a fair bit mate, ive owned both and there's jack in it really, clio slightly quicker

 

[Chris n nic]

140bhp at the wheels probably m8y

Chris

 

[Keydogg]

ok guys, thanks for the info guys!

 

[Lucas]

Not a lot in it until motorway type speeds by all accounts.

172 should pull away fairly comfortably after about 80/90 as the VTS weight advantage becomes less significant.

 

[rory182]

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=251619&f=160&h=0

 

[gazcaddy]

Im assuming you mean she was five car lengths in front from the beginning rather than the 172 pulling 5 lengths on you?

 

[sh33n]

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?t=251619&f=160&h=0

Error?

 

[Griff]

Error?

Worked for me. Discussion about 106GTi v 172.

 

[thedoc]

had a vts before the 172, quick cars, clio just a bit quicker, but not by much.

 

[Fred@BTM]

we had a 172 in that had a broken rocker, one of the inlet valves had NEVER opened from factory

it was slow

 

[Neil G]

I wouldn't be bothered about speed..172 is a better car all round.

 

[Loopz]

PMSL...Griff ignore my Report...

VTS arn't slow! And i've never heard of an RS bein under 160bhp!

No?

Well, i guess there's a first time for everything.

 

[Loopz]

we had a 172 in that had a broken rocker, one of the inlet valves had NEVER opened from factory

it was slow

The car that was runing on 15 valves only?

You could tell there was something seriously wrong with that car just by looking at the RR graph...

 

[Fred@BTM]

yeah it had been a 2.0 15v since coming out of the factory!!

it wouldn't hit the rev limiter, it kinda just gave up at around 6000rpm

 

[wide]

andy @ gdi, told me a story about a guy with a 182 who had it rr'ed at 150bhp at the fly. you can get good ones & bad ones, maybe yours is a slow one or maybe your girlfriend just can't drive lol

 

[EVOgone]

Every VTS i have seen wasnt very quick....especially 3rd onwards..

 

[Keydogg]

150bhp @ the fly.. :| that's a bit scary!

how can there be that much difference in the engines? i mean i know every engine is different, like +/- 5bhp, but -30bhp, wtf? that thought is just scaring me now, hope we haven't bought a dud

 

[Takeshi Kitano]

Maybe worth taking it to a rolling road just for some piece of mind. Its probably running fine. I thought my car wasn't running great but I took it to Dastek for the RR and it was fueling fine and producing the right power.

 

[Dubai182]

5 car lengths is quite a lot is it not?

 

[Keydogg]

i suppose it is, its just that it didnt seem to be visually pulling away that much, and she put her foot down about half a sec before me so i thought that might acocunt for it. i dunno, i think i'm just being paranoid!

 

[ukaskew]

i suppose it is, its just that it didnt seem to be visually pulling away that much, and she put her foot down about half a sec before me so i thought that might acoc**t for it. i dunno, i think i'm just being paranoid!

Depends what gear etc she was in I suppose, and if she was changing up at the right time. I've been embarrased by a Citroen Pluriel thing on the entrace to a DC before because I was sat in 5th at 40mph and wasn't expecting the road to open out. Driver ability would even play a part in something as straightforward as driving fast in a straight line.

 

[Keydogg]

well she was in 4th and so was i, and she said she changed around 7400 (maybe a bit high) and she had an extra person in the car. she was about 5 car lengths infront at the end of 4th im probably making a meal from nothing i just expected it to pull away more i guess!

 

[Lagerlout]

Not really anything in it below 100. It's quite feasible that a 130bhp VTS and a 166BHP Clio would have a similar power to weight ratio. Add to that the peppier gearing in the VTS and you can see how the two could be close......

BUT I have pasted a VTS quite convincingly.... guess you get good and bad examples of both cars.

Either way, I know the Clio isn't the ultimate status symbol, but I'd sooner nail my balls to a sinking ship than be seen in a Saxo.

 

[jezp]

she should have got a cup alan

 

[Keydogg]

Lol Jez, she wanted air con and leather etc shes not as hardcore as you (in the car sense!)

as for lager lout i couldn't agree more, everyone instantly thinks im a chav cos i own a saxo, i guess its the cheapest form of almost-but-not-quite reliable speed! cheers u lot.

Jez do u know a local rolling road? and how much ££ it would cost?

 

[Neil G]

Not really anything in it below 100. It's quite feasible that a 130bhp VTS and a 166BHP Clio would have a similar power to weight ratio. Add to that the peppier gearing in the VTS and you can see how the two could be close......

BUT I have pasted a VTS quite convincingly.... guess you get good and bad examples of both cars.

Either way, I know the Clio isn't the ultimate status symbol, but I'd sooner nail my balls to a sinking ship than be seen in a Saxo.

lol at the sinking ship comment.....my sentiments exactly!

 

[jezp]

erm think theres one called alpine near smith and nephew odeon area