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.
172 has leather/alcantara, climate control A/C, ABS, xenon lights (with light sensor), auto wipers, rear headrests, split folding rear seat and comes with a full size alloy spare. Cup has none of the above but has the bigger rear spoiler and front chin spoiler and revised suspension (only minor but has different offset wheels to give wider track)
performance wise nothing in it, supposed to be a slightly more focused drive handling wise but what it really boils down to is whether you want the toys and interior or not. Cup only comes in iceberg silver or more commonly mondial blue. 172s come in flame red, pearl black, iceberg silver and i forget the name but a dark metallic blue
MarkCup
ClioSport Club Member
Wuss
Remapped derv Golf
The Cup looks much better imo and less like a 1.2 with those boring 5 spoke wheels. imo
Although given the choice between a Cup and a 172 Id choose a 172 (with turinis and a Cup spoiler)
307 hdi (powered by derv)
I have just been on this site and it has the same figures for the 172 and 172cup. 0-60 in 7.3 and top end 138? Are these right as some of you are saying cup is quicker. http://www.wisebuyers.co.uk/motoring/car-specifications/Renault/Clio+%282001-%29/RE002342/http://www.wisebuyers.co.uk/motoring/car-specifications/Renault/Clio+%282001-%29/RE002342/
Also the spec on our home page says 6.9 for 0-60.
Im confused
307 hdi (powered by derv)
UPDATE: Just found this on parkers. Do these sound more realistic?
The <A class=iAs style="COLOR: darkgreen; BORDER-BOTTOM: darkgreen 1px solid; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; TEXT-DECORATION: underline" href= "http://www.parkers.co.uk/choosing/carreviews/review.aspx?model_id=1263&page=2#Renaultsport <A class=iAs style="COLOR: darkgreen; BORDER-BOTTOM: darkgreen 1px solid; BACKGROUND-COLOR: transparent; TEXT-DECORATION: underline" href= "http://www.parkers.co.uk/choosing/carreviews/review.aspx?model_id=1263&page=2#Clio has always had a 2.0 16V engine. This produced 172 bhp when it was launched in 2001, but was uprated by 10 bhp, to 182 bhp in early 2003. Performance figures are impressive. The 172 gets to 60 mph in 7.2 seconds and onto 138 mph; the 182 has a 0-60 time of 7.1 seconds and a top speed of 139 mph. Cup versions are lighter and quicker - 60 mph comes up in 6.9 seconds with both versions; top speeds are identical. Lines up well with its rivals.
MarkCup
ClioSport Club Member
As can I quite happily around the big boys in their 182s and V6s
Driver is everything...0.2 is nothing. Theyre more than quick enough.
Cup has thinner windscreen, less soundproofing, no engine cover, no boot net, cheap floor mats, lower spec CD player and speakers, no traction control, no cruise control..... er thats about all I can think of that hasnt already been mentioned. It has stiffer springs and dampers, is lower (about 3mm), 89kg lighter and a few points quicker in a straight line (according to the book - there are good and bad ones. My 172 is quicker than my mates old one, but wouldnt get near some of the Cups on here.
I bought a 172. But I ended up buying Cup turinis (the offset makes no noticeable difference imho btw. I think its something like 3mm) a Cup splitter and a Cup spoiler. So deep down I obviously wanted a Cup. lol.
[Edited by lagerlout1 on 24 June 2005 at 12:39pm]
Titanium ph1 turbo
Quote: Originally posted by Loony on 24 June 2005
ignore the 0-60 specs, theyre different depending on where you look be it autocar, evo, or any other motoring publication. supposedly the cup is 0.2 of a second quicker to 60 so in other words f**k all difference.
erm, wrong...
thats about 7 car lengths at 854mph
here u go, from the 172 cup book
3mm lower, splitter, larger rear spoiler, improved aerodynamices, great downforce revised suspension, higher front spring rates,
20mm wider track front and 10mm wider track rear
89kg lighter, no spare wheel, no abs, sound deadening changed, no a/c, side airbags, no xenons.
theres other stuff here but ill be typing for ages
I wasnt aware of the difference when I brought my 172. but if I had know I think I still would have gone for the 172 not the cup cuz I like the leather/alcantara seats.
There are things that the cup has such as the front splitter (which I have just brought) that I like.
Oh, and I was under the impression that the cup is 0.1 of a second faster from 0-60.
MarkCup
ClioSport Club Member
Speak for yourself mate. Not all of us bought the Cup because it was cheaper.
To some of us, less is more
Quote: Originally posted by Loony on 24 June 2005
Quote: Originally posted by Neil82cup on 24 June 2005Quote:
performance wise nothing in it,
[/QUOTE]
Thats BS and you know it.Im not going to start bickering but i know several cup owners(ex owners) and we pitted my mk2 172 against all of their cups on numerous different occasions and there was a gnats c**k, rizzla paper...etc between the cars on ever occasion and in numerous different speeds gears and different roads. If you ask some of the guys on here that have put the two cars head to head on track days they will tell you the same. Assuming you are putting two good or two bad ones against each other (there seems to be a bit of a difference in the power made from car to car) its all down to the driver, end of.[/QUOTE]
Ive had a different experience, bro had a 172 (goodun) and there was a difference on road, end of.
I test drove a few full fat 172s and Cups and couldnt feel any difference between them, both very very quick. I went for the Cup because Im not interested in luxuries (I dont even use the stereo) and preferred the Mondial Blue/Turnini effect to the normal 172.Quote: Originally posted by MarkCup on 24 June 2005
Speak for yourself mate. Not all of us bought the Cup because it was cheaper.
To some of us, less is more
Less is indeed more (especially as I didnt want or need anything apart from a steering wheel and pedals
) but any performance gains on normal roads are unoticeable IMO.Similar threads
