Clio sport 182 or honda civic type r??

[Chris87]

Hi This spring Im planning to sell my 1.2 clio and planning to get a little sport car but I can make my mind up 182 racing blue or the civic type r are they both same in performance
cheers
Chris

 

[Mr Burns]

Honda

 

[Beef-Mc]

I must admit, I saw the older Type-R in red the other day and it looked cracking.

 

[Lewis_S]

Hate to say it but CTR

 

[Jamie]

If I had a £1 for everytime I say this: I'd drive both, come to a conclusion.

 

[jam-the-man]

ive had both ctr any day mate.

 

[kendz]

If I had a £1 for everytime I say this: I'd drive both, come to a conclusion.

Absolute must is to get out and drive both.I drove both and came to the conclusion that I preferred the clio. Each to their own though.

 

[Robidiot]

for the budget i had i found i could never get a well spec'd civic. 182 has xenons, climate control, cruise control....

so i got a 182 in the end

 

[Paul.]

A type r over a 182ff. Really??:S

 

[.J.a.m.e.s.]

clio

 

[Munson]

Clio for more involving handling. Civic for far better engine and drivetrain, and a more solid build. The Clio rolls a lot, and has a very slow rack. The Civic has equal grip if not more, but is far less inspiring due to a complete (not almost) lack of any steering feel. Performance wise, they're pretty much identical up to legal speeds, but the Civic keeps on accelerating after the Clio runs out of steam. The Clio isn't exactly unreliable, but the quality of materials and engineering is quite poor. Melting steering wheels, creaky suspensions, toffee engine mounts etc. etc.

The Clio will be more fun, but the Civic is the better car.

 

[jam-the-man]

Clio for more involving handling. Civic for far better engine and drivetrain, and a more solid build. The Clio rolls a lot, and has a very slow rack. The Civic has equal grip if not more, but is far less inspiring due to a complete (not almost) lack of any steering feel. Performance wise, they're pretty much identical up to legal speeds, but the Civic keeps on accelerating after the Clio runs out of steam. The Clio isn't exactly unreliable, but the quality of materials and engineering is quite poor. Melting steering wheels, creaky suspensions, toffee engine mounts etc. etc.

The Clio will be more fun, but the Civic is the better car.

Couldnt of put it better myself :approve:

 

[Poopensharten]

The civic will cost less in general maintenance I.e its chain driven and only requires valvle clearance every 25k/24 months. Oil should be changed every 7-9k if your picky.

Has to be worked hard to make it move though thus making for sub 25mpg figures

 

[jenic]

for the budget i had i found i could never get a well spec'd civic. 182 has xenons, climate control, cruise control....

so i got a 182 in the end

Same for me.

CTR was on my shortlist but compared to the same price clio the civics were poorly specced and much older.

 

[Munson]

The Civic will also use a lot of oil if you drive around with vtec kicked in a lot y0.

 

[Poopensharten]

The Civic will also use a lot of oil if you drive around with vtec kicked in a lot y0.

Its not on the same scale as the W@nkel boys tbf.

A top up at most, not enough to rule it out certainly

 

[Chili Red]

CTR is probably the better car as said, but it still looks like a breadvan.

Seeing as there's not a lot in it performance-wise I'd pick the 182 because it's far better-looking.

 

[Munson]

The Honda is really all about the engine and gearbox IMO. The way it spins makes the 182 unit feel like it's about to throw a rod. It also doesn't have a rough idle, and doesn't run on 3 cylinders for a half a mile every morning

 

[Poopensharten]

Generaly a more reliable convincing experience then lol

 

[Munson]

Generaly a more reliable convincing experience then lol

The Clio has more character though and, as said already, has better equipment levels. Difficult to choose between them. I'd choose the Civic, but probably only because I've already done the Clio thing.

 

[Mark R27]

Clio is better value imo, Civic lacks cruise control, aircon is an option, doesn't have automatic lights/wipers etc, most lack spots. However that Vtec engine is brilliant.

I'd have the 182 and I think there's better examples out there compared to the Civics.

 

[Poopensharten]

Absolutley mate, the Clio definatley has more character. The Honda is predicatble, you know/expect what its going to do and how its going to behave, Not like the Clio.

Both very capable hatches i do however think that the Clio is the more under estimated of the two

 

[Paul.]

Id agree with that Daniel

 

[DrR]

never driven a CTR, but i'd probably buy one, the lack of steering feel i could live with for better everything else.

 

[rclio2006]

Hi This spring Im planning to sell my 1.2 clio and planning to get a little sport car but I can make my mind up 182 racing blue or the civic type r are they both same in performance
cheers
Chris

Civic type-r

 

[jonnytheboy]

I got rid of my ctr to get a newer clio 182 and have never looked back, the clio turns in better and doesnt need reving so hard to get anywhere!!! the only thing i miss is the noise.

 

[Sir_Dave]

My review from when i tested them back to back in '05:

Civic Type-R, very comfy, and the gearbox was lovely with good positioning on the dashboard, but didn’t do anything until 10 million revs and the steering was very artificially weighty which I didn’t like. The thing that put me off the most though was that it was like driving a rocket powered Renault Espace, it felt and looked like I was driving a family bus. A good car for a young couple with a newborn child, lots of space and practicality but with decent driving fun for the weekends – great for the guy who refuses to grow old and buy an estate car to please the wife and kids.

Clio 182 with both cup packs. I got in, turned the traction control off and pulled away …. it felt alive, excellent steering, with feedback bombarding you from all angles. Reminded of the first time I drove a 106 gti, just like a go-cart with the potential for much grinning and idiotic driving. Hit 5k rpm and it took off, spinning round to the redline before you realise its time to change gear. Awesome fun and just what I want, im losing the outright speed of my car (a Z3M), but the buzziness and handling ability more than make up for it . . and it’ll cost bugger all to buy & run. Brilliant, im off to find one ...

I think that says it all tbh

 

[gaz44]

The civic will cost less in general maintenance I.e its chain driven and only requires valvle clearance every 25k/24 months. Oil should be changed every 7-9k if your picky.

Has to be worked hard to make it move though thus making for sub 25mpg figures

Provided neither car breaks, would the Civic not cost more to run overall? Insurance, mpg, service, etc...

 

[Poopensharten]

Provided neither car breaks, would the Civic not cost more to run overall? Insurance, mpg, service, etc...

The Civic will return about the same MPG as a 182 when not hammering it up the rev range everywhere.

The oil situation isnt that bad, again if revved hard everywhere then possibly but not on a par with the rotary units

Its a group 17 but it wont be that much more expensive than a 182 to insure. Its really down to personal preference i suppose

 

[Gally]

Good chat and reviews.

 

[clio_luke]

civic is better and would be the sensible choice.
but i would have the 182 for the fun element.

 

[172boost]

My review from when i tested them back to back in '05:

Civic Type-R, very comfy, and the gearbox was lovely with good positioning on the dashboard, but didn’t do anything until 10 million revs and the steering was very artificially weighty which I didn’t like. The thing that put me off the most though was that it was like driving a rocket powered Renault Espace, it felt and looked like I was driving a family bus. A good car for a young couple with a newborn child, lots of space and practicality but with decent driving fun for the weekends – great for the guy who refuses to grow old and buy an estate car to please the wife and kids.

Clio 182 with both cup packs. I got in, turned the traction control off and pulled away …. it felt alive, excellent steering, with feedback bombarding you from all angles. Reminded of the first time I drove a 106 gti, just like a go-cart with the potential for much grinning and idiotic driving. Hit 5k rpm and it took off, spinning round to the redline before you realise its time to change gear. Awesome fun and just what I want, im losing the outright speed of my car (a Z3M), but the buzziness and handling ability more than make up for it . . and it’ll cost bugger all to buy & run. Brilliant, im off to find one ...

I think that says it all tbh

Exactly the same reason I would never buy a CTR over a 182.
182's are cheaper as well and don't tend to get stolen as much.

 

[gaz44]

The Civic will return about the same MPG as a 182 when not hammering it up the rev range everywhere.

The oil situation isnt that bad, again if revved hard everywhere then possibly but not on a par with the rotary units

Its a group 17 but it wont be that much more expensive than a 182 to insure. Its really down to personal preference i suppose

Sure. I reckon I'd go with the CTR.

 

[.Gem.]

I definately think that the Clio's are a more raw fun car than CTR's.

Haven't owned a CTR but have been in several, and much much preferred the Clio's

I agree with those that have said get out there and test drive some, try and drive a couple of each if you can, to get a good feel for them.

 

[Ralphizzle]

Wanted a CTR or a CRS (172) at the time.
Went for a 172... Bang for buck!

Still got a soft spot for a Cosmic Grey CTR (>2002) though.

The CTR has to be poked more for driving fast / shifting more.
Whereas the CRS has a wider range.

Just make sure to drive both for a back-to-back comparison.

 

[Poopensharten]

I probably would aswell if im honest.

Im all for reliability, they are far too common though

JDM is where its at

 

[Poopensharten]

Wanted a CTR or a CRS (172) at the time.
Went for a 172... Bang for buck!

Still got a soft spot for a Cosmic Grey CTR (>2002) though.

The CTR has to be poked more for driving fast / shifting more.
Whereas the CRS has a wider range.

Just make sure to drive both for a back-to-back comparison.

Im sure the CTR's in cosmic grey were after 2004 i.e the anniversary editions ?

 

[Gally]

I actually think these days i'd go for a type -r maybe a couple of years ago I would have said 182.

You have to rag the clio aswell to get the best out of it performance wise, it hardly has low down torque!

 

[Sir_Dave]

JDM is where its at

The whole concept of JDM Ep3's makes me roffle.

They're still made in Swindon lol.

 

[Ralphizzle]

You could be right Danny!
With (>2002) i meant the updated front.

Quite common in the UK, seeing numerous on Pistonheads classifieds.
CTR and the CRS are not that common across the pond.

CTR's where assembled in the UK... right?