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!

Clio V6 vs Golf VR32



  MKIII 138
lol at book eating comment :D I was just typing out some specs and then clicked on the link ohh well true to form ..

VW R32 240 HP SAE @ 6,250 rpm; 236 ft lb , 320 Nm @ 2,800 rpm Kerbweight = 1546.3 <!
Clio V6 255 bhp SAE @ 7150 rpm; 221 ft lbs, 300Nm @ 4650 rpm Kerbweight = 1400kg

not much in it really, the R32 isnt permanent 4wd its manily fwd but can switch to 4wd when the grip is needed but then again RWD V6 doesnt struggle for grip with a heavy 3.0 v6 sat right over the wheels. The heavier kerb weight of a Golf means a 6.2 to sixty (thats on the faster and more expensive DSG box ) but the Clio V6 can manage a 5.8. to 100mph i think it would be quite even but 146kg weight penalty and 15bhp down on power is slightly undone by the golfs access to 15lbft more torque and crucially its only at 2800RPM where as you have to rev to the middle range with the 4650rpm of the V6.

in a straight line drag to 100 the V6 would be faster. but the golfs low down and slight extra torque would mean that in driving terms on roads with corners where power is needed low down i think all the extra weight disavantage would disapear and the golf would be marginally faster, factor in the golfs easy to exploit fwd chassis and when grip exceeds a switch to 4wd then i think you would have to be a brave man to try keep up in the wide and rear heavy V6, so for a drag race ( 90% of blats on uk roads) the V6 would be in front, throw in a set of corners and the golf would be in front with the golf driver feeling more confident to chuck the car around due to fwd traction of heavy engine over the front but increased grip of 4wd system if needed.

neither one is outright faster than the other they both have there times when they could compete and win in a different circumstance.

price well list prices are/were £25,000 for the Golf and £27,000 for the ClioV6

both exellent cars the german is (usually)built better and will go for many thousands of miles, has exellent seats, great steering wheel, driving posistion and decent stereo and of course is safe. the clio is mad looking not quite as safe if only for the rear heavy rwd handling and has ok`ish seats (for a £27k car that is) and build is again average.

each to their own, the R32 looks and feels expensive and is a really top quality car but is subtle, the Clio V6 is very wild looking and ostentaious car with a great soundtrack but there again so has the R32 (especially with a miltek system)

a sensible person would choose the newer and better handling R32, an individual and lets face it a poser would choose a V6.

Id Choose an R32 as I hate posers

9/10 R32
7/10 Clio V6





-----------

there you go hope i dint let you down lol lol :D
 
M

M7CUO_V6

I would have a r32 over a v6 if i had the money, due to performance and quality.

Although the v6 has better road presence/looks and image for sure.

I would say on a track the r32 would be all over the clio...
 
  ST
Who cares the V looks millions better.....in terms of road presence the V smokes the R sitting still..
 
  MKIII 138
^ true but its a posers car the V6 and doesnt seem to forefill its intended roll as a performance car its more of a showboat a chrysler crossfire from france
 
  RB 200 Cup!
V6 does it for me - but again like others have said wouldnt mind owning both to see the differences
 
  RenaultSport clio 172 CUP
My mate had a V6 (MARK1) and sold it for an R32.


He seems to think the R32 IS quicker and just a better car all round.


I think if he had owned the mark 2 it would have been a differant story as I understand they are a far better car as far as performace and handling are concerned.
 
  BMW 330d :)
i'd have the mk2 v6 over the r32 anyday. But id have the r32 over the mk1, such was the improvement between the 1st and 2nd versions.
 
  Megane 225 Cup
There is no denying that the vr32 is one tasty motor.. but id have the v6.. makes me look more hooliganish :D
 
  Golf 7R
R32 everyday of the week, its build quality alone sets it above, its nice to have a car thats ultimatley not going to be in dealers more than its on your drive, taking nothing away from the Vee to look at its superb!

In reply to b3nje, golfs are common as muck, but not the r32's dont see that many...
 
I'd rather have an R32 any day of the week they're in a different leauge to a V6. The R32 can carry 5 people in perfect comfort for a start with lots of room. The build quality is great, and the handling is brilliant if you're giving it some welly. My mates also ran a 14.3 as standard at york which is v6 territory, and he remapped it to 275bhp for free using a vagprom or whatever its called.

Matt
 
  Golf 7R
Exactly my point, 5 doors ideal for family safe and reliable, and not far off Vee in terms of performance...is it really that hard to choose between the 2, the R32 is also a head turner believe me!
 
  3 MPS, MX5
I've had both, so can verify that on the road the V6 Clio is a quicker car than a std R32, but I've also had an AmD'd 300bhp R32 which was obviously quicker than the V6 Clio but not by much. Although the modded R32 had a hell of a lot more torque which was great for everyday driving.

I would say though that if on a dry track the V6 Clio would be quite a bit quicker as Meggerman says the R32 is basically front wheel drive so does tend to push the front wide into corners.

Both are great cars and if I had to choose to keep just one car then the R32 would be it, because of practicality. The Clio V6 is a toy for weekend posing just as much as any other supercar because of lack of room...not saying that you can't use on a daily basis because you can, its just the lack of room.
 
  Golf R soon...
After owning the 182 for a few months now my next car would def. be a r32 over a vee.

I can't deal with the rattles and the plastic anymore, its driving me :mad:
 
  Elise/VX220/R26
I rekon V6 is faster on the road. R32s look ok but they are overweight, wieghed down by a pointles FWD biased 4wd system. The V6 might be a bit porky but transmission losses are minimal, the mk2 has more power than a mk1 R32. My old meg 225 made mincemeat of R32s, I wouldnt have been so confident against a V6. I would say the v6 is more of a drivers car. R32s are too much of a comprimise in terms of their weight and lack of power, they are really just posing machines, not anywhere near as quick as they should be.
 
no ones mentioned the 130i m sport

which tbh is a direct rival to the r32..........its quicker in a straight line, with proper grown up handling too
 
  Exige S1 + Honda S1
ralph wiggum said:
no ones mentioned the 130i m sport

which tbh is a direct rival to the r32..........its quicker in a straight line, with proper grown up handling too

but it would just look like you are driving your mums car.... no thanks
 
  Elise/VX220/R26
ralph wiggum said:
no ones mentioned the 130i m sport

which tbh is a direct rival to the r32..........its quicker in a straight line, with proper grown up handling too

to be fair I'd say the 130i is in a different league to the R32 and V6. Bar a bit of internal BMW politicsn (ie not wanting to upset M3 owners) its an M car essentially
 


Top