clio 197 or clio 182?

[Jamie]

Im with Alan.

I would rather have the more comfortable and easy to live with car. I am in my car for an hour each day on a commute of which I am sat in traffic or on the m-way and very rarely get to thrash a car nor am I able to drive a car to its limits. In the real world there would be no difference's to me but would prefer the newer car.

The reason I have a hot hatch is desire, although a 1.2/1.4 would service my needs but does not look as nice and does not accelerate as quickly as I want on the slip roads or where I am able to open it out in 2nd or 3rd..

 

[ForceIndia]

So you've answered your own question then - you choose your cars based purely upon handling and performance as a personal choice, as it meets your requirements as an owner based upon your usage. This is why i dont need a trophy or cup, because its then a compromise on gadgets and comfort, which are critera i look for. A standard Clio wouldnt meet all my personal buying criterea either, as it doesnt carry the exclusivity or rarity I also like to look for. For me, the steering is not important, because i just never cane my car around corners. It something I've never even considered as a flaw.

PS - when i say i prefer the 197 over a 182, its not a knock to the 182 at all, I had one for 3 years and it was very good to me. A lovely car.

Fair enough, can't really argue with your perspective in that case.

 

[Gaz_]

....and whats all this 197's are slow business? Ask the Cup driver i OVERTOOK last week. Both giving it full berries. I out dragged him. FACT. And yes, he was trying. I could hear it

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?t=384793

 

[ForceIndia]

Bugger all between them, 197 feels slighty slower, but isn't.

 

[Gaz_]

Its called refinement. See, people in here whinge about the cluncks, tinny-ness, rattles, general gruffnes of the mk2. Renault fix most of this for the MK3, now people moan as its appareantly slow. No, thats just better sound proofing and buid my fellow CS chumps! 197 FTW!!!

 

[Paul.]

this is just a silly thread tbh. whatever car that person has (197 or 182) theyre going to say their own car. Well 90% are. Those who have forked out 10k+ on the new clio will not come in to this thread and admit the 182 is just as good , if not better. Theyre both good in their own ways imo. I like the looks of the 182 better but i can imagine the 197 is a better built car. However i think the 197 is too big (almost the same size as a meg and i feel that 182s (for the price you can get them now) are MUCH better value for money.


I would buy a 197 cup though

 

[Kneel]

If I didn't do 20k miles a year, I would:rasp:. Weight blunts every aspect of performance, it's no surprise the 197, VXR's, etc etc have been less well received than the prev gen CTR, Trophy etc etc.

heh...
[youtube]iGPwGf80wTA[/youtube]

It looks pretty fast and fun when driven straight after a lighter than light 'proper drivers car', and thats on standard 197 suspension not cup suspension. I know that people often say that the 197 is a poor drivers car because its heavy and because the steering has no feel but frankly, its b*llocks you dont feel the weight, the steering is about the right kinda weight when pushin the car hard however is nice and light when pissin around in a car park and trust me when I say when your pressing on in the car over some nice country roads there are few cars that'll make you smile without you having to wet yourself if the back end gets a bit lively. It an awesome car to drive, and I found it much more pleasurable to drive over my friends 172. EVERY control is much more positive, the gear change/short throw, the steering, the brakes and sure you need to be in the power band before it really 'goes' but thats the same of ANY car, its just the power band is slightly higher than the 172. The MPG is at worst 2-3mpg lower than a 172, its not a huge difference really.

 

[ForceIndia]

It looks pretty fast and fun when driven straight after a lighter than light 'proper drivers car', and thats on standard 197 suspension not cup suspension. I know that people often say that the 197 is a poor drivers car because its heavy and because the steering has no feel but frankly, its b*llocks you dont feel the weight, the steering is about the right kinda weight when pushin the car hard however is nice and light when pissin around in a car park and trust me when I say when your pressing on in the car over some nice country roads there are few cars that'll make you smile without you having to wet yourself if the back end gets a bit lively. It an awesome car to drive, and I found it much more pleasurable to drive over my friends 172. EVERY control is much more positive, the gear change/short throw, the steering, the brakes and sure you need to be in the power band before it really 'goes' but thats the same of ANY car, its just the power band is slightly higher than the 172. The MPG is at worst 2-3mpg lower than a 172, its not a huge difference really.

This is where problems arise, people not accepting well know facts. Every review of the 197 I've read (and in my own experience) has criticised the 197 steering weight and feel. It's very accurate, but too light and numb.
Most (honest) 197 drivers are quoting 197mpg as 27average. I easily got 35 out of both of my 172's, thats a 20% difference, hardly insignificant.

 

[Kneel]

I'm comparing my avg mpg to my friends mpg, as we both do mostly town driving and no motorway so its a direct comparison. I get 29mpg, he gets 32mpg so pretty insignificant for me. I accept it has light steering around town, but as in the video and from personal experience its well weighted when your pushing the car hard. It is lighter than the 172 no doubt, but its not too light and I can feel what the wheels are doing which to me, is all that matters anything more than that is unnecessary 'feel' that people who prefer older cars (in general, not just 1*2 owners) think is a hugely important factor in having a drivers car... Aslong as I can feel what the cars doing, its not numb imho.

 

[RobHardyUK]

From owning all of them, I cant really detect much difference. However on way to trax last year (had the current 172 at this point with 35k miles) it was comfortably out pulling my friends 10k 197. he had a one person disadvantage however, which wouldnt help obvisouly.

Anyway calling performance similar, the 197 is a much improved car Guess steering feel and the low ratios/lack of torque where my only complaints. so much better in every other area though!

 

[Gaz_]

Hows it have lack of torque when it has more than a 172?

 

[RobHardyUK]

Hows it have lack of torque when it has more than a 172?

ib.ft per tonne is lower. its not so much that, its more the delievery of it. it doesnt have much till a higher rpm - my grudge was between 1-3k rpm there wasnt alot at all. i mean as soon as you built the revs up it got better.

 

[Munson]

TBH the lower overall gearing is no doubt there to help combat the weight. Gearing is often overlooked when the windows calculator is used for bhp & lbs/ft per ton.

I'm considering starting to look at getting a 197 for a while TBH. I'm kind of 'between' price brackets at the moment (I'll only buy cash now) and can't really decide on something costing £30k+ until I know where my next contract is coming from.

In the meantime I'd happily roll around in a Nimbus 197 for a while. If it annoys me long term on the motorway I could sell it. I certainly won't be buying another Clio II

 

[binksy]

Both great cars loved driving them both when i worked at renault but the 182 was in my price range plus the other thing is no matter what badge or exhaust its got on saying its a sport a ph 2 clio is still seen as a 1.2 and gets no respect so its fun thrashing bigger and better cars where as the bigger ph3 with its rear diffuser and fancy side vents gets repected and people just dont have the same look on there face when you blow past them lol

 

[Darren S]

197 without any shadow of a doubt. Sure, there are a couple of downsides over a 182, but there are a thousand upsides. If my next car didn't need to be a motorway weapon as well as epic fun, I'd have snapped up a 197 ages ago. As much fun as I've had in my 182, it's had its day now. More rattles appear every mile, comedy driving position designed for a (short) clown. The list goes on.

Amazing poll results so far. I guess it's just hard to let go sometimes.

Also, the 197 often doesn't photograph too well. In the flesh they look sensationally muscular, yet restrained and classy. Everything a Corsa VXR isn't. Nimbus R27 is the best looking Clio ever made. Done.

I don't understand comments like that - simply because that's a million miles away from the real reason why I voted for the 182.

As I've said before, a new Evo X or a zero miler Evo VI in front of me? The 6 would win every time. The 10 is much newer, the first to have a brand new engine and has looks that are growing on me. But the 6 is what pulls 'at' me. The one that just makes me look at in awe and think that the designers have got nearly everything just right on the car.

What about the Ferrari F40? The F50 is ten years newer. But you're saying that it would be 'hard to let go' for the F40 owners considering selling up and buying the newer car - back in the day? Hand on heart for the vast majority on here - who would prefer the F50?

I'm the first to admit that comparing the all-time No.1 Ferrari to its replacement and then comparing a 1*2 to a 197, is clearly taking the piss. But the principle is there.

Progress is essential. Progress is vital. It may tick all the boxes that your mind and rational logic dictate to be true. But that doesn't always mean that your heart follows suit.

I still prefer the 1*2. Warts and all. Its nothing at all to do with 'letting go'.

D.

 

[Munson]

I don't understand comments like that

It feels like it's falling apart.

 

[renno]

the 197 is a far better car in every way.its grown up .

 

[Neil G]

197

IMO better car all round than the 182, be some good deals out there at the moment on them too

 

[Russ.]

Love my 182. But i think overall id rather have a 197 although having said that id rather have a 225 r26 over the Clio's

 

[jay172cup]

Hmm standard 197 vs standard 182?
=197

or cup packed 182 vs 197
=182

cup packed 182 vs 197 cup
=197

197 cup vs 172 cup
=172 cup

+1
completely agree

 

[Munson]

lol I thought the 172Cup might somehow emerge as the winner in that epic calculation

 

[alanc1000]

This is a very encouraging poll.

According to the "what car do you own" poll, only 12 of us here so far have registered as owners of 197s.

Usually you would expect people to vote only for the car the own, but this shows that people are slowly but surely coming round to the idea that the 197 is a desirable car.

Not that there is anything wrong with a 182, i loved my old one, but it is nice to see that people can begin to admit they are falling in love with the 197, rather like I did!

 

[bradkenning]

I recently became the proud owner of a 197. I was very close to getting a 182, but after a few seconds drivin a 197 my mind was made up. For me its an all over better package.. Times change and things move on.

 

[rosssei]

honestly......after owning a 172 cup, 182 LY and the 197 what would i buy?

172 Cup i LOVED - much better imo than the fully modded LY 182! But it was basic and if not concentrating too hard would try and kill you. Its an enthusiasts car and a car that IMO should be brought out once a week and given death on a track!

LY was nice - but it was a real rattler! Prob due to mods etc but ended up hating it for loud exhaust and lowness and bouncyness!

197 i love EVERYTHING about - fuel economy lets it down a tad but who buys a hot hatch for fuel economy?! Ride is nicer (as standard and on coils), has a VAG feel to it as far as build quality is concerned, short ratio box is to die for, and is a slightly bigger car (comparable to a EP3 civic IMO)

And as for the "197s are slow" brigade....maybe mine is a particularly healthy one but on a private stretch me and a friend in a bog standard '04 182 went for it to over 100 and there was NOTHING in it....

so either his was slow or mine is quick according to some of you!

it feels like your not going as hard yes - but def nothing in it as far as performance goes!

 

[ForceIndia]

Nowt wrong with that. Some people see the refinement, the easy going nature of the car as a good thing. What people fail to understand is that not everyone feels that way. I love the way my car 'feels' more rapid than a 197. I love the better steering feel. I love that when I'm really pushing it, it can feel a bit scary and light at the back. The 197 is competent, but I didn't get enough feedback from the car. My car is just as competent, but buzzes with feedback. Does that make it less refined? Very. Would I sacrifice the feedback for refinement? No.
Horses for courses.

 

[Munson]

Love popping back in these threads to add some more shizzle.

Regarding performance, I think any sensible person knows that they're virtually identical to a 182, but is that the important part? It is a fact in my experience that they do feel slightly slower. Less willing to go without provocation. That to me is a tangible difference and is enough for me to say, to myself at least, that the 197 isn't as quick, even though I know it is. What I do know is that they're far easier to confidently rip up a B-road in than my 182Shed Edition, so point to point I feel a 197 is faster in the hands of the average spirited driver on the average spirited drive. (maybe not at 105% on some track, warren )

It doesn't matter to me though. I voted 197 and I think it's a superior car in virtually every other regard.

 

[Rossy197]

Got a 182... Was gonna part ex for a 197 but when i drove the 197 it felt sluggish compared to my 182.. So in the end decided to save and keep my 182.. I must add though the 197 feels bigger inside it just wasnt for me

 

[DNP182]

Each to their own. Having owned a 182 for four years and now an r27 I can absolutely say with confidence that the 197 is a far superior car. I loved the 182 and was sorry to see it go, but the 197 is just soooo much better.

When I first test drove a 197 I thought the same like others on the forum...it felt slow / sluggish to the 182. After a second test drive I started to re-think my first opinion. Then, after a 3rd test drive, I was hooked. The 197 is by no means a slow car. I would argue that it is definately as quick or quicker than the 182.

I took a friend out for a race in it the other night who owns a remapped wrx pumping out over 280bhp and he was well impressed with the 197. I don't know if mine has been remapped as I bought it second hand, but i was able to hit just below 70mph in 2nd gear while my friend was in the car...now, if that's slow!!!!

I certainly wouldn't belittle anything about the 182...absolutely brilliant wee car, but times move on and things evolve...I don't regret the change.

That's just my two pennies worth lol

 

[Magic Johnson]

Based purely on looks...the 182.

Haven't driven either and don't expect to for a good few years yet but the 182 is far nicer looks wise imo.

 

[jeffymw]

172/182 for me

 

[Michael172]

Well seeing as i dont have either. The 197, but only if it was the R27. Normal one fails and so does the Cup. IMO the better built (I SAID BETTER im not saying it is) of the 2 and its a bigger car.

Would only have a 182 if it were the trophy. And even then id rarther not have another MK2.

Have Driven both, the 182 feels more explosive with its 5k kick lol and ive driven the 197 cup which is a lot smoother through the revs.

 

[c__w]

IMO having driven both (albeit brefily) the 197 isn't the leap in refinement people have mentioned - it is better though as it's a better driving position, better build (doors shut much nicer etc) and feels more solid. In terms of noise on the road I found both to be fairly similar although I drove an early 06 plate 197 but the later longer ratios apparently that much longer. The 182 I drove had a much taller 5th than the 6th in the 197 which is probably why on the motorway at around 70ish they seemed about the same to me.

The 197 feels so much more planted and bigger (yes I know it is bigger!) and the gearbox is probably one of the nicest I've ever used (light and super short-shift). The ride felt very firm and there were a few buzzes as you might get from the 182. Biggest difference in the drive for me is the lack of torque-steer in the 197 which really makes it feel more stable.

Both look good in their own way but for me parked next to each other the 197 wins easily due to the flared arches with vents and rear diffuser.

 

[mark1989]

in nths thread i chose the 172/182 now i am totaly into the looks etc ov the 197 it has grown on me quite alot in th last year cant wait to get mine in the summer!!

 

[Jonny_Paul]

I chose 197 although I drive a 182. I just cant afford a 197 so i got the next best thing!

 

[Bash]

looks like 10 more people like the 1*2's. after 182 votes.....interesting coincidence, tell you anything?

 

[Russ.]

looks like 10 more people like the 1*2's. after 182 votes.....interesting coincidence, tell you anything?

lol good spot

 

[WILLIE]

I would of opted for the newer 197 but as the MPG is awful and the miles I do, I opted for a 182. They are a cracking looking car in all ways, Driven a few before I bought a 182 but just couldn't justify the extra dosh and money on petrol. Saying that the 1*2's are no saints on fuel but they are better and every little helps.

 

[alanc1000]

I would of opted for the newer 197 but as the MPG is awful and the miles I do, I opted for a 182. They are a cracking looking car in all ways, Driven a few before I bought a 182 but just couldn't justify the extra dosh and money on petrol. Saying that the 1*2's are no saints on fuel but they are better and every little helps.

The MPG is bad, but not as bad as you think. It costs more to fill the tank in a 197 because the tank is bigger, but in real terms its about a £5 difference per tank compared to the 182.

 

[CabinFever]

The MPG is bad, but not as bad as you think. It costs more to fill the tank in a 197 because the tank is bigger, but in real terms its about a £5 difference per tank compared to the 182.

Yeah id go with that.

Mine has levelled itself out now at around 28-30ish Mpg, and with the petrol prices slowly dropping, i dont think its expensive to run at all really!

 

[WILLIE]

The MPG is bad, but not as bad as you think. It costs more to fill the tank in a 197 because the tank is bigger, but in real terms its about a £5 difference per tank compared to the 182.

Yeah id go with that.

Mine has levelled itself out now at around 28-30ish Mpg, and with the petrol prices slowly dropping, i dont think its expensive to run at all really!

I can see where your coming from. The only downside is that I do 15k+ miles a year so even me buying a 182 is not what anyone would call practical :approve:




I test drove the 197 myself and found it a pleasure to drive. Fantastic seats, good position and so on but one of the only problems I found was getting back in my 206GTi. The power felt the same even though the cars are in two different leagues of each other. It seemed that the fact I had to rev it hard to unleash the power just made it seem slow, when in fact its not and is by far a lot faster then my old GTi.

When getting into the 182 everything felt just right but that's only because since I was 16-17, I've always wanted one and to have the chance it couldn't be missed.

197 and the 182 to me are both fantastic cars, along with the 5 turbo, Williams and so on. I just see it as yet another great hot hatch from Renault as once again they have made a cracking job of a what a hot hatch should be.