Dont want to start arguement......

[Gaz_]

go on youtube and type in "fifth gear civic type r" and you should get a vid of a ctr vs a 182. then you'll see that all these comments about a ctr not being a good handling car are all nonsense. round a track a ctr should beat an rs clio, except for maybe the 172 cup or 182 trophy

thats one vid, there are loads posted up here with the clio beating ctrs round different tracks. Poof it aint

 

[Rich]

go on youtube and type in "fifth gear civic type r" and you should get a vid of a ctr vs a 182. then you'll see that all these comments about a ctr not being a good handling car are all nonsense. round a track a ctr should beat an rs clio, except for maybe the 172 cup or 182 trophy

Can't believe your using Tiffs crap lap in a 182 as part of the arguement, he had so much wheelspin at one stage the car was stationary.

 

[John185k]

Tiff gauges a car how good it is on how far it drifts. He is a t**t.

 

[Justin]

this last page contains far better, more open minded, non biased reviews than the other other 3 pages. to the original poster, i suggest you just read this page and ignore the rest as they just contain silly arguments (of which i was involved in [hangs head in shame]) and even sillier comments.

it's ineveitable that these two cars are gonna be debated as they are both so good and close performance wise. if you're into revving hard and really using the gearbox to keep it in the power band than not much will come close to a ctr in it's category. if you're into go kart handling and chuckability and a punchy and responsive engine not much beats the clio.

looks are all down to the individual. however if you don't mind spending the money on an ecu and remap, the ctr will leave any standard (non v6)clio for dead all through the rev range. and if you spend a little extra on exhaust and induction you will be beating any standard v6 255 too. (like mine does:rasp: )

go on youtube and type in "fifth gear civic type r" and you should get a vid of a ctr vs a 182. then you'll see that all these comments about a ctr not being a good handling car are all nonsense. round a track a ctr should beat an rs clio, except for maybe the 172 cup or 182 trophy

Fair comments there, apart from modded vs standard.. never mind.. i like both, but quite honestly i could afford to buy and insure the CTR.. but looking back, im glad i went for the clio..

i must see around 6 or 7 CTR's everytime im out, and yet to come across one that can pull away or even keep up with me.. granted they are nicer inside, better gearbox etc.. so depends what you want..

maybe the CTRs are so popular because they are that good, which is fair enough, but i quite like the underestimation most drivers have of the clio.. and i like the fact i have only ever seen another striped 182

 

[Justin]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7taI8slbPq0 clio vs type r..

 

[Ad]

You always seem to state your opinion as fact, when it is not fact. I could have afforded a CTR no problem, but I chose the Clio. Many people on this forum could have.

What makes a car fun to drive? In my opinion, light weight (clio is lighter), feedback (clio has more), sensation of speed (clio wins again, feels faster), responsiveness (clio felt more responsive).

Each to their own and all that, but its quite simply not a case of a civic being better simply because its more expensive, which is exactly what you are trying to say,

And I dont buy this BS about evo being owned by renault either. Wow, its the best car in its class, but you cant say that because thats biased. Funny how evo preferred the new cooper s to the 197 though innit.

usual rubbish, I state my opinion from expierence of different cars having owned a 172, 182, CTR and driven a 182 trophy extensivley. I.E probably 1k+

Secondly as a "forum member" dont spout off about about this being a clio forum as dont contribute.... BTW I am a clio owner now

The comment about cost was purely that the CTR is not worth the extra cost to everyone, some maybe not afford, some maybe not prepared to pay the extra. I wouldnt be so knaeve as to think that people who bought a clio couldnt afford a CTR,

If you can name another magazine that comapres a clio with an M6.. then I withdraw the comment, I know EVO isnt owned by renault, but they are rather biased.

 

[Neil G]

ive never driven a CTR, so my opinion is probably not worth much, but ill chip in anyway.

Every time I see a CTR i think to myself 'Nice car mate'. Its built better, it seems a tad more mature, and I personally think they look ok. Granted the RS is more 'raw', more hardcore as a hot hatch, but the CTR appears to edge away from that just a tad to give you a few creature comforts.

Granted, the steering feel might not be up there with the clio, but then you're sat in a far more solidly built cabin. Granted it may not be massivly faster for the money, but lets not forget, £500 will boost the CTR a hell of alot more than it will the clio.

I would however buy the clio if it was a straight choice between the two, for this, one and only reason.

I see at least one CTR, sometimes more, at some point every day, on the road somewhere. I see another RS, once every few days, if that. The clio is more exclusive, and I like that.

[/uninformed rambling]

Totally agree

I think the CTR is appearing on a lot of company car fleets so may be the reason why I see so many around.

 

[christurbo]

if you're into modding there's more potential with a ctr. what with it being japanese and all. and with the right exhaust they sound amazing. and with a hondata ecu they develop quite a lot of torque down low. i really must get a video made so you can hear mine. it's a total beast

I had a Spoon N1 backbox with Spoon B Pipe fitted with only 6 miles on the clock!!!!!! -----> my CTR sounded fantastic - too noisy for everyday use so I sold alot of stuff.

It is now std.... and fantastic :approve:


Here ar some pics:-

With 12 miles on the clock!:-

 

[fizzy_drink]

Go for the CTR, it has better seats, better gearbox and is reliable as is the day long, and it can match the 182 for speed, might lose a tad of steering feel, but thats a smalll price to pay for the reliability...bullet proof!!

Honda/Civic maybe good but there not perfect there loads of problem with them plus many 182 owners heva perfect cars no problems.

Err, yes like me?

 

[christurbo]

And A Vid:-


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FrTjfNMA-6A

 

[tameracingdriver]

You always seem to state your opinion as fact, when it is not fact. I could have afforded a CTR no problem, but I chose the Clio. Many people on this forum could have.

What makes a car fun to drive? In my opinion, light weight (clio is lighter), feedback (clio has more), sensation of speed (clio wins again, feels faster), responsiveness (clio felt more responsive).

Each to their own and all that, but its quite simply not a case of a civic being better simply because its more expensive, which is exactly what you are trying to say,

And I dont buy this BS about evo being owned by renault either. Wow, its the best car in its class, but you cant say that because thats biased. Funny how evo preferred the new cooper s to the 197 though innit.

usual rubbish, I state my opinion from expierence of different cars having owned a 172, 182, CTR and driven a 182 trophy extensivley. I.E probably 1k+

Secondly as a "forum member" dont spout off about about this being a clio forum as dont contribute.... BTW I am a clio owner now

The comment about cost was purely that the CTR is not worth the extra cost to everyone, some maybe not afford, some maybe not prepared to pay the extra. I wouldnt be so knaeve as to think that people who bought a clio couldnt afford a CTR,

If you can name another magazine that comapres a clio with an M6.. then I withdraw the comment, I know EVO isnt owned by renault, but they are rather biased.

ad is that all you can say because i have my opinion that you happen to disagree, that its usual rubbish. Is it the fact that you have owned a few various cars and paid a fiver towards this place make your opinion more worthwhile than mine or anyone elses? No need to answer that BTW i think we all know the answer...

Honestly, *yawn*

I dont really feel the desire to pay for this place with its endless circular topics, seems to be about 1 CTR v clio topic a weel on here, followed by the usual jerking off over the civic, the derision of anyone who doesnt agree and the constant observation that evo is a division of renault sport because nobody here can actually seem to admit the clio is the best car in its class (people seem to conveniently forget that technically the two cars arent even really rivals at all).

Really, i dont know why i waste my time, but suffice to say i wont be in future.

Have a good day!

 

[richlawson]

i had a clio 172 cup so was going to get the type r next but when i drove it i wish i had kept my clio the civic is built better but the clio cups are 100 percent more fun

 

[John D]

You always seem to state your opinion as fact, when it is not fact. I could have afforded a CTR no problem, but I chose the Clio. Many people on this forum could have.

What makes a car fun to drive? In my opinion, light weight (clio is lighter), feedback (clio has more), sensation of speed (clio wins again, feels faster), responsiveness (clio felt more responsive).

Each to their own and all that, but its quite simply not a case of a civic being better simply because its more expensive, which is exactly what you are trying to say,

And I dont buy this BS about evo being owned by renault either. Wow, its the best car in its class, but you cant say that because thats biased. Funny how evo preferred the new cooper s to the 197 though innit.

usual rubbish, I state my opinion from expierence of different cars having owned a 172, 182, CTR and driven a 182 trophy extensivley. I.E probably 1k+

Secondly as a "forum member" dont spout off about about this being a clio forum as dont contribute.... BTW I am a clio owner now

The comment about cost was purely that the CTR is not worth the extra cost to everyone, some maybe not afford, some maybe not prepared to pay the extra. I wouldnt be so knaeve as to think that people who bought a clio couldnt afford a CTR,

If you can name another magazine that comapres a clio with an M6.. then I withdraw the comment, I know EVO isnt owned by renault, but they are rather biased.

So many people missed the point of that article its not even funny! Did you actually read it? or just see the title and make your mind up it was a load of b****cks?

All it was showing was that for all the M6's horsepower and outright performance it could'nt destroy a well sorted hot hatch through tight and twisty (yes...'the twisties') roads.

Whats the matter with comparing those two cars? IIRC they never said the Trophy was better overall.

 

[Justin]

usual rubbish, I state my opinion from expierence of different cars having owned a 172, 182, CTR and driven a 182 trophy extensivley. I.E probably 1k+

Secondly as a "forum member" dont spout off about about this being a clio forum as dont contribute.... BTW I am a clio owner now

The comment about cost was purely that the CTR is not worth the extra cost to everyone, some maybe not afford, some maybe not prepared to pay the extra. I wouldnt be so knaeve as to think that people who bought a clio couldnt afford a CTR,

If you can name another magazine that comapres a clio with an M6.. then I withdraw the comment, I know EVO isnt owned by renault, but they are rather biased.

So many people missed the point of that article its not even funny! Did you actually read it? or just see the title and make your mind up it was a load of b****cks?

All it was showing was that for all the M6's horsepower and outright performance it could'nt destroy a well sorted hot hatch through tight and twisty (yes...'the twisties') roads.

Whats the matter with comparing those two cars? IIRC they never said the Trophy was better overall.

Thats what i thought when i read it

 

[John D]

What - that it was a load of b****cks? or what I said?

 

[Justin]

what you said, it was more about just because a car has all this power, doesnt mean its that much faster

 

[Maz]

pmsl at don't want to start an argument and that the clio is the best car in its class .. a clio owner would say that !!

 

[christurbo]

I love these threads!

When im on the CTR forums its the same.

Also when Im on the VX220 and Lotus forums its the same!

 

[Neil G]

Same old

 

[Gaz_]

remember tha the CTR is in the same class as a MEGANE, not a clio.

 

[Maz]

Same sh!t different day ..

 

[tameracingdriver]

pmsl at don't want to start an argument and that the clio is the best car in its class .. a clio owner would say that !!

Well ok then... this is my last reply to this thread, and hopefully, to any other of these inane threads, but i'll let you ponder that for moment.

First, forget about the CTR, its NOT in the same size class as the Clio, nor was it really in the same price class, given that its OTR price was originally around £2k (more like £3k with air con) more than the clio. It is therefore not to be considered in the same class at all.

So what was left at the time of the 182?

Well there was the Ibiza Cupra, fast, but no faster than the 182, and the handling is poor (and i've driven it before anyone says anything).

Smart ForFour Brabus. Has anyone actually seen one?

Fiesta ST? Heavier and less powerful.

Colt CZT? Less powerful, worse handling.

Lupo GTI? Are these even in the same class? Less powerful by far.

Fabia vRS? I owned one of these. Nice cars, but in no way as good a hot hatch.

106 GTI / Saxo VTS - Maybe a bit small and cheap to be considered real rivals, but in my eyes, the most competitive rival. Also near to or at the end of their lives as the 172 and 182 were around.

206 GTI - I think most people on here would agree the clio is more highly regarded, outperforming (just) and outhandling.

So why do people on here think that stating the 182 is the best hot hatch in its class so ridiculous?

On that note, i am done with this equally ridiculous thread. I am going to try my best not to contribute to them any more, because they are, well, pointless.

 

[Kinsella]

Theres also the point that a civic type R looks like a civic type R !! looks expensive and sporty, the Clio RS at first glance just looks like a clio 1.2 etc..... ??

 

[Kinsella]

my cup actaually has 1.2 headlights haha thats prob why, i want xenons

 

[ozzie]

go on youtube and type in "fifth gear civic type r" and you should get a vid of a ctr vs a 182. then you'll see that all these comments about a ctr not being a good handling car are all nonsense. round a track a ctr should beat an rs clio, except for maybe the 172 cup or 182 trophy

Can't believe your using Tiffs crap lap in a 182 as part of the arguement, he had so much wheelspin at one stage the car was stationary.

you can't be serious mate. if you look at tiff's history he has consistently been one of the top racing drivers this country's had over so many years.(not anymore but a few years back). the man knows how to do a fast lap. you call it a crap lap, but not many could do better.

the times where he does all his sideways (like in the 197) stuff is purely for tv and entertainment, but it's clear in that vid he's trying to get round in the quickest time possible.

i'm not saying this is out and out proof that the ctr is quicker (although i believe it is, slightly). one lap from one man can't prove that and i have also seen vids of clio's beating ctr's. my point was really to show that ctr's can handle well if driven properly

 

[Kinsella]

Some one once told me this !!!

"Arguing on internet forums is like winning the special olympics !! Even if you win, your still retarded !!"

pick the bones out of that haha

 

[John D]

Some one once told me this !!!

"Arguing on internet forums is like winning the special olympics !! Even if you win, your still retarded !!"

pick the bones out of that haha

LOL

Strangely addictive however........

 

[John D]

Same sh!t different day ..

Groundhog Day

 

[Neil G]

Theres also the point that a civic type R looks like a civic type R !! looks expensive and sporty, the Clio RS at first glance just looks like a clio 1.2 etc..... ??

I think that's one of the best things about the 172/182....the styling is subtle.

 

[Rich]

Can't believe your using Tiffs crap lap in a 182 as part of the arguement, he had so much wheelspin at one stage the car was stationary.

you can't be serious mate. if you look at tiff's history he has consistently been one of the top racing drivers this country's had over so many years.(not anymore but a few years back). the man knows how to do a fast lap. you call it a crap lap, but not many could do better.

the times where he does all his sideways (like in the 197) stuff is purely for tv and entertainment, but it's clear in that vid he's trying to get round in the quickest time possible.

i'm not saying this is out and out proof that the ctr is quicker (although i believe it is, slightly). one lap from one man can't prove that and i have also seen vids of clio's beating ctr's. my point was really to show that ctr's can handle well if driven properly

It was a crap lap, the CTR was still moving at the same point on the lap, though somehow he managed to get the Clio stationary in a cloud of tyre smoke at the same point. I did not lok to me as if he was trying to ge tit round in the quickest possible time. People on here go on about the EVO 182 bias but it seems Tiff had a CTR bias!

In response to other bits on the thread regarding the cost of the 182 v CTR, I had the chance to buy both new and choose the one I prefered.

 

[Tim(e)]

Theres also the point that a civic type R looks like a civic type R !! looks expensive and sporty, the Clio RS at first glance just looks like a clio 1.2 etc..... ??

Thats why Honda released the 1.6 Sport which looks identical to the TYpe R minus the badging and alloys...

Kinda takes away form the Type R's uniqueness although its great for those who want the look but can't afford or don't want the insurance/running costs!

 

[ozzie]

pmsl at don't want to start an argument and that the clio is the best car in its class .. a clio owner would say that !!

Well ok then... this is my last reply to this thread, and hopefully, to any other of these inane threads, but i'll let you ponder that for moment.

First, forget about the CTR, its NOT in the same size class as the Clio, nor was it really in the same price class, given that its OTR price was originally around £2k (more like £3k with air con) more than the clio. It is therefore not to be considered in the same class at all.

So what was left at the time of the 182?

Well there was the Ibiza Cupra, fast, but no faster than the 182, and the handling is poor (and i've driven it before anyone says anything).

Smart ForFour Brabus. Has anyone actually seen one?

Fiesta ST? Heavier and less powerful.

Colt CZT? Less powerful, worse handling.

Lupo GTI? Are these even in the same class? Less powerful by far.

Fabia vRS? I owned one of these. Nice cars, but in no way as good a hot hatch.

106 GTI / Saxo VTS - Maybe a bit small and cheap to be considered real rivals, but in my eyes, the most competitive rival. Also near to or at the end of their lives as the 172 and 182 were around.

206 GTI - I think most people on here would agree the clio is more highly regarded, outperforming (just) and outhandling.

So why do people on here think that stating the 182 is the best hot hatch in its class so ridiculous?

On that note, i am done with this equally ridiculous thread. I am going to try my best not to contribute to them any more, because they are, well, pointless.

with the exception of the 206 gti, they are all warm hatches at best. imo the rs clio and ctr are in the same class. they have roughly equal power to weight ratios and are almost indetical in speed. whoever said the ctr is in the same class as the 225 megane is wrong because that didn't come out til 2004. the main rivals at the time where the clio, leon, 206 and ctr. you can't say the 182 is the best hot hatch when comparing it with a fiesta st. you have to put a ctr in there somewhere. it seems you've lowered it's status by now saying the ctr is in a higher class and comparing your clio with lesser cars. it's like lying about your age and playing football in the under 16's when you're really 21.

 

[Neil G]

Agree

CTR definately in the same class as the 182

 

[ozzie]

you can't be serious mate. if you look at tiff's history he has consistently been one of the top racing drivers this country's had over so many years.(not anymore but a few years back). the man knows how to do a fast lap. you call it a crap lap, but not many could do better.

the times where he does all his sideways (like in the 197) stuff is purely for tv and entertainment, but it's clear in that vid he's trying to get round in the quickest time possible.

i'm not saying this is out and out proof that the ctr is quicker (although i believe it is, slightly). one lap from one man can't prove that and i have also seen vids of clio's beating ctr's. my point was really to show that ctr's can handle well if driven properly

It was a crap lap, the CTR was still moving at the same point on the lap, though somehow he managed to get the Clio stationary in a cloud of tyre smoke at the same point. I did not lok to me as if he was trying to ge tit round in the quickest possible time. People on here go on about the EVO 182 bias but it seems Tiff had a CTR bias!

In response to other bits on the thread regarding the cost of the 182 v CTR, I had the chance to buy both new and choose the one I prefered.

it weren't a crap lap mate. how can you judge that. i don't think either of them are biased. evo says the clio is quicker on real roads and they're probably right. with the average driver at the wheel, the clio might well win if you raced the two. so evo are right in that respect. but on a track, where these cars were partly developed, the ctr won by a fraction of a second. it was so close that you can see it was genuine. put the stig at the wheel and it might be the other way round. put someone else at the wheel it might be the other way round again. my point initially was, the ctr can handle just as well as a clio on the track

to kinsella, it may be a bit retarded arguing about two cars on a forum but i personally love talking about cars. blokes do it down the pub all the time. only this way we get to do it with people all over the country. look how may people have got involved in this topic (yourself included) and how long it's gone on for. we must all enjoy it coz we've all got something to say. and why not, that's why we log on.

however talking about people being biased or saying a professional racing driver can't do a proper lap is a load of boll*cks. why would he be biased, think about it.

 

[ozzie]

Agree

CTR definately in the same class as the 182

thank you. you talk sense

 

[Phill1978]

the Civic is more a racing bike wheras a Clios is more of a clowns bycyle as such if that makes any sence.

brilliant, i actually understand what you mean

 

[ozzie]

if you're into modding there's more potential with a ctr. what with it being japanese and all. and with the right exhaust they sound amazing. and with a hondata ecu they develop quite a lot of torque down low. i really must get a video made so you can hear mine. it's a total beast

I had a Spoon N1 backbox with Spoon B Pipe fitted with only 6 miles on the clock!!!!!! -----> my CTR sounded fantastic - too noisy for everyday use so I sold alot of stuff.

It is now std.... and fantastic :approve:


Here ar some pics:-

With 12 miles on the clock!:-

i've got this exhaust and it is fantastic. i heard it from the outside for the first time the other day coz my mate was driving it and it almost sounds like a sportsbike on full throttle. can be quite loud on motorway journeys though. especially when you've got a race manifold fitted (no cat):evil:

 

[ozzie]

this last page contains far better, more open minded, non biased reviews than the other other 3 pages. to the original poster, i suggest you just read this page and ignore the rest as they just contain silly arguments (of which i was involved in [hangs head in shame]) and even sillier comments.

it's ineveitable that these two cars are gonna be debated as they are both so good and close performance wise. if you're into revving hard and really using the gearbox to keep it in the power band than not much will come close to a ctr in it's category. if you're into go kart handling and chuckability and a punchy and responsive engine not much beats the clio.

looks are all down to the individual. however if you don't mind spending the money on an ecu and remap, the ctr will leave any standard (non v6)clio for dead all through the rev range. and if you spend a little extra on exhaust and induction you will be beating any standard v6 255 too. (like mine does:rasp: )

go on youtube and type in "fifth gear civic type r" and you should get a vid of a ctr vs a 182. then you'll see that all these comments about a ctr not being a good handling car are all nonsense. round a track a ctr should beat an rs clio, except for maybe the 172 cup or 182 trophy

Fair comments there, apart from modded vs standard.. never mind..

what do you mean by this mate? the modded vs standard bit?