EVO Mag June 2010 172 cup vs 200 cup

[Gorms]

yeah it has some fancy instruments...but compared to the williams....the driver involvement is almost zero....felt so detatched from the 200 when driving it. granted, i didnt thrash it round a track, but new cars just seem to lack soul.

So you drove it normally?

Love threads like this, reminds me on the 5th gear one. First thing i was thinking when i read the first post was "fixed".

I wouldnt say older cars have soul more like character and to be totally honest a 172 is still a pretty modern car.

Oh well good to see the 200 did good and maybe one day i will take a corner a little to quickly and not end up in the bushes due to the car having its soul removed. Sometimes i think people forget clios are normal cars and not race cars.



Paul

 

[ForceIndia]

So you drove it normally?

Love threads like this, reminds me on the 5th gear one. First thing i was thinking when i read the first post was "fixed".

I wouldnt say older cars have soul more like character and to be totally honest a 172 is still a pretty modern car.

Oh well good to see the 200 did good and maybe one day i will take a corner a little to quickly and not end up in the bushes due to the car having its soul removed. Sometimes i think people forget clios are normal cars and not race cars.



Paul

The best cars should be a wee bit challenging to drive. You'd probably wet your wee knickers in a 205gti.

 

[Jasey]

The best cars should be a wee bit challenging to drive. You'd probably wet your wee knickers in a 205gti.

you'd $hite yourself in a montego turbo (I almost did) - The original hedge seeking missile

The 205 was like a Nissan Sunny compared to the "best" of british

 

[Gorms]

The best cars should be a wee bit challenging to drive. You'd probably wet your wee knickers in a 205gti.

Lift of oversteer isnt a challenge plus im almost 30 so i can say i have owned a few cars that were a challenge. Karting in the rain is the only time i have got my knickers wet

I agree with what you say about the best cars but we are talking about a clio. Guessing thats the reason most of the best cars are rwd.

Paul

 

[2 live]

So you drove it normally?

Love threads like this, reminds me on the 5th gear one. First thing i was thinking when i read the first post was "fixed".

I wouldnt say older cars have soul more like character and to be totally honest a 172 is still a pretty modern car.

Oh well good to see the 200 did good and maybe one day i will take a corner a little to quickly and not end up in the bushes due to the car having its soul removed. Sometimes i think people forget clios are normal cars and not race cars.



Paul

lol.yes i drove it normally......which to most on here would be caining the arse out of it...and teh cs police id just be plain stupid/wrong/c**t/........whatever.

yes clios are normal cars...the rs range though should be a step above, and more. they are the hot hatch, and we all know.....well those that were post puberty when the icons of this breed were still around.....that the hot hatch IS the race car, of the range.... the giant slayer, the car that will put a smile on your face and get the adrenaline pumping.........sadly....the 200 did none of this for me.

 

[Gorms]

lol.yes i drove it normally......which to most on here would be caining the arse out of it...and teh cs police id just be plain stupid/wrong/c**t/........whatever.

yes clios are normal cars...the rs range though should be a step above, and more. they are the hot hatch, and we all know.....well those that were post puberty when the icons of this breed were still around.....that the hot hatch IS the race car, of the range.... the giant slayer, the car that will put a smile on your face and get the adrenaline pumping.........sadly....the 200 did none of this for me.

Thats fair enough. I think the problem with modern car is the fact there are too many rules a regulations that the manufactures must stick too. I dont think there are any modern hot hatches that would get you adrenaline pumping as they just dont/cant make them like they did back in the 80s/early 90s.

On the other hand people dont want to own old cars and want fresh ones that wont fall apart and havent been thrashed to death and looking at the results i would say renault have done a good job with the 200 (maybe not so much the front end). Credit where it is due imo.

Paul

 

[2 live]

Thats fair enough. I think the problem with modern car is the fact there are too many rules a regulations that the manufactures must stick too. I dont think there are any modern hot hatches that would get you adrenaline pumping as they just dont/cant make them like they did back in the 80s/early 90s.

On the other hand people dont want to own old cars and want fresh ones that wont fall apart and havent been thrashed to death and looking at the results i would say renault have done a good job with the 200 (maybe not so much the front end). Credit where it is due imo.

Paul

fair point on the regs etc. personally i think theyd be better off teaching people how to drive properly in the first place. after all, the aim of passing the test is to show confidence and prove that you have full control of the car. abs/tc/esp etc etc etc all detract from a driver EVER having full control of said car.

as they old saying goes....they dont make 'em like they used to......unfortunately.


and btw......not ALL of us want to drive round in ugly looking, heavy, thirsty cars that have no soul/character and give you no sense of achievment etc. some of us have our own individual tastes

 

[Tav]

Most people on here won't notice the ABS/TC/ESP is even on. It's just there to save their bottoms when they run out of talent.

I love how people speak about Clio Williams and 172 like they are dripping in soul/character. People holding up 90's hatch backs on pedestals is laughable. A Clio 200 in essence is very similar, just refined. Much like a 997 GT3RS gen.2 is accused of losing some soul...pah...it is at the end of the day far superior to any preceding 911. Yes even a 2.7 RS or 930T.

Someone tried to tell me my 182 Cup didn't have the soul of his Mk2 Golf GTi...excuse me, it's the same f-ing thing. 2.0 engine, machpherson struts, rear beam and plenty of power for the weight. The only difference is I have a healthy euro ncap rating, more performance and newer registration adorning the front of my car.

Some cars do lose character but I don't believe for one second Renault Sport suffer this problem (not yet anyway). If someone plonked a collection of Clios in front of me and asked me to pick up the keys of the one I wanted, it'd easily be a 200. Recaro seats, big brakes and high speed stability would certainly get the adrenaline pumping.

 

[jordan172]

anyone know what empty welsh road they used? for the super car thrash?

 

[Gorms]

Someone tried to tell me my 182 Cup didn't have the soul of his Mk2 Golf GTi...excuse me, it's the same f-ing thing. 2.0 engine,

:nono:

Paul

 

[Matty_N]

For me they both do the same task very well, however one's a hooligan and the other's all grown up. Each has it's preferred market.

This.

 

[nathanH]

<-----

 

[gp motorsport]

absolutely not.

If anything the 200 Cup is more focussed than the earlier cars.

I've owned a 182ff, 182 Trophy and my brother owned a 172. Now have a 200 and I can assure you that not an ounce of soul has been lost in the development of the newer car. They've just added a few extra bits to make it even better.

Like for example; Recaros, Brembo brakes, even more sophisticated chassis, even firmer damping and better roll control, wider tyres, excellent short shifting 6 spd box, quick ratio steering, higher reving engine, more power.

What's not to like?

correctamundo you said it m8
geo

 

[gp motorsport]

i have a 325bhp modded subaru 08 sti hatch and a ly clio 200 rs the best car to drive is the clio
most fun ,the clio
best handling the clio
comfort the clio
grin factor the clioooooooooooooooooo
car spec recaros, cup pack
on back roads the clio is faster, more nimble,
out the box the clio handles great ,brakes are amazing
bump and rebound are just right
i should know ,i supply and fit uprated suspension goodies
geo

 

[Tav]

:nono:

Paul

Sue me, 0.2L out?

 

[Gorms]

Sue me, 0.2L out?

0.219L out to be correct but I will let it slide this time

Paul

 

[CabinFever]

I was waiting for the fanboy to comment on this thread!

:boring:

 

[Tony Hunter]

This reminds me of the 5th Gear at Millbrook all over again.

 

[Pinkorstink]

This reminds me of the 5th Gear at Millbrook all over again.

I e.mailed 5th Gear about this and their reply was to ensure me the results were a true representation. Suppose they would say that though!

 

[Tony Hunter]

I still have the script at home,but I'm not going into all that again.

 

[domjolly]

Not that I have driven a 200 but I own a 172 and I have read this review and it was obvious the 200 would win it's had another 6 years of technology evolving and getting better!! Although I fully believe it's better on track on the road would you really notice the extra "performance" it's the same as the 172vs 182 debate all rs clios have near as makes no difference road going performance just newer cups will be faster than olders ones because they will have better cornering ability due to all the extra weight they carry and the advancements in suspension technology!

 

[domjolly]

That made no sense about the extra weight I meant to say because of the extra weight they have to make the suspension better to out do the older light weight cars

 

[Henry]

just reading this in the mag and it says there's a vid of the 'shoot-out' on their site, but can't find it - has anyone else?
skimmed the thread and couldn't see it mentioned

 

[Gaz_]

Anyone notice how the 172 Cup was quicker than the 182 Trophy..............

 

[papman]

I wasn's going to mention that as I did not want upset them... Just bask quietly in our glory...

 

[The Spaniard]

Journalists love a narrative. It sells magazines and papers. This 'story' will have been written back at base weeks ago.

I have neither car and no vested interest in the result but i find it amazing that everytime Renault bring out a new car, despite it being heavier than the last one it is always miraculously quicker. Despite real world evidence and basic physics showing that lighter cars on track are usually quicker.

 

[KMB]

Quite often the newer heavier car is not touted by journalists as being quicker, take a look at FN2 and EP3 CTR for example... There is more than juust weight to consider and I don't think anyone is disputing the 200 is a pretty good package for getting from A to B in a hurry

 

[darko18781]

Anyone notice how the 172 Cup was quicker than the 182 Trophy..............


A bit slow I know, but I thought I'd read the article before chipping in. Half a second on the Trophy and almost a second on the 197 cup round Bedford. It's testament to the 172 Cup that it's even being compared to a great car like the 200 cup, that has 6 years of development and technology on it, let alone an extra £10k, give or take. That's even before we start getting into the issue of fun and driver involvement etc etc...

 

[The Spaniard]

6 years of development? Hmm, i was thinking they bolted on the usual tried and tested mass manufacturered systems to a mass produced shell to make a mass produced car.

 

[Joeh]

Journalists love a narrative. It sells magazines and papers. This 'story' will have been written back at base weeks ago.

I have neither car and no vested interest in the result but i find it amazing that everytime Renault bring out a new car, despite it being heavier than the last one it is always miraculously quicker. Despite real world evidence and basic physics showing that lighter cars on track are usually quicker.

how do you find it amazing its quicker, FYI the clio 200 is lighter than the 197 so thats youre first point out the window, secondly its got more midrage which will have helped pulling it out of the slower corners so why do you believe that its all a 'fix'

i own a 172 cup and have driven and been in a few 197's and i can say that they are a muchmuchmuchmuch better car to drive, they feel more stable and the steering is more direct, the handling just pisses all over 1*2's too theyre uncomparable.
I don't get why other owners of 1*2's insist on finding any little excuse to say that their car is better, just because you don't own a 197/200 doesn't mean you have to tell yourself that theyre a lot worse than the car you own.
Go drive one then come back with you're honest oppinion.

 

[Joeh]

Anyone notice how the 172 Cup was quicker than the 182 Trophy..............


A bit slow I know, but I thought I'd read the article before chipping in. Half a second on the Trophy and almost a second on the 197 cup round Bedford. It's testament to the 172 Cup that it's even being compared to a great car like the 200 cup, that has 6 years of development and technology on it, let alone an extra £10k, give or take. That's even before we start getting into the issue of fun and driver involvement etc etc...

an extra 10k??? so youre comparing new prices v old prices.

how much was a 172 cup new???

 

[darko18781]

6 years of development? Hmm, i was thinking they bolted on the usual tried and tested mass manufacturered systems to a mass produced shell to make a mass produced car.

Uh hu...ok??

 

[darko18781]

an extra 10k??? so youre comparing new prices v old prices.

how much was a 172 cup new???

Roughly 14 grand for a 200 cup minus 4 grand for a decent 172 cup = 10 grand in now prices.

 

[KMB]

That does not make sense :dead:

I think you'll find that money is worth less now, due to something called inflation.... So, when launched, if they both could be bought for £14k (which is not so far off), then the 200 Cup is actually the cheaper car in real terms.

Simple really :rasp:

 

[darko18781]

LOl, I just meant if you went out and had the choice of buying either tomorrow, there would roughly be a 10k difference, thats all. Not that complicated really.

 

[The Spaniard]

That does not make sense :dead:

I think you'll find that money is worth less now, due to something called inflation.... So, when launched, if they both could be bought for £14k (which is not so far off), then the 200 Cup is actually the cheaper car in real terms.

Simple really :rasp:

No, because you have not considered that we currently have wage deflation and credit is now both more scarce and more expensive. Based on this i would suggest that the 172 cup was more affordable when it was released.

The real expensive Renault Sport car was the 1.8 16v. 14k back in the early 90's with lower wages, virtually no car finance and the same price as the soon to be released higher spec Williams. Ouch.

 

[Gorms]

LOl, I just meant if you went out and had the choice of buying either tomorrow, there would roughly be a 10k difference, thats all. Not that complicated really.

Its not complicated but its a stupid coment. Its like saying the the 172 is more likely to break down. The fact is the cars are very simular in price and some 200 have been picked up for around the £13k mark.

No, because you have not considered that we currently have wage deflation and credit is now both more scarce and more expensive. Based on this i would suggest that the 172 cup was more affordable when it was released.

Average loan interest rates around the time of the 172 was released were higher than they are now. Some dealers even offer 0%. Credit is only scarce to the unemployed or people with money issues and i dont think you would have found anyone owning a 172 that had either money or employment issues.

Pointless arguments. Just admire the 200, maybe not for its looks but for what it has achieved and credit where it is due and quit b**ching

Gorms

 

[_WILL_]

6 years of development? Hmm, i was thinking they bolted on the usual tried and tested mass manufacturered systems to a mass produced shell to make a mass produced car.

I don't get what you mean, im pretty sure Renault Sport put a fair amount of development and invest a lot of money into the models they release! Then price them very well. Obviously they are still mass produced, but its far from what you are suggesting!

i own a 172 cup and have driven and been in a few 197's and i can say that they are a muchmuchmuchmuch better car to drive, they feel more stable and the steering is more direct, the handling just pisses all over 1*2's too theyre uncomparable.
I don't get why other owners of 1*2's insist on finding any little excuse to say that their car is better, just because you don't own a 197/200 doesn't mean you have to tell yourself that theyre a lot worse than the car you own.
Go drive one then come back with you're honest oppinion.

I was always under the impression that the 197's were more polished in the way they drive and obviously the build quality and feel is in a different league, but that the 1*2's were more fun to drive, that the improved dynamics had reduced the fun! I have not driven one but, it is something I have heard (not just from 1*2 owners either!)

No, because you have not considered that we currently have wage deflation and credit is now both more scarce and more expensive. Based on this i would suggest that the 172 cup was more affordable when it was released.

Surely it depends on how you are planning on paying? I paid cash for my cup, I couldn't have afforded to do that when it was new! Also there are some pretty good deals to be had on new cars now, so I don't really agree with your argument, alot of dealers are throwing savings at you! I know people have less money in general, but I think a new car is just as obtainable as when the cup was launched, but people are spending their money more conservatively now, it's not that they can't actually afford a new car but they are holding back a bit just in case.

 

[darko18781]

Its not complicated but its a stupid coment. Its like saying the the 172 is more likely to break down. The fact is the cars are very simular in price and some 200 have been picked up for around the £13k mark.

What you're trying to say is it's all relative?? Fair enough. All I'm trying to say is you can get a lot of car in the 172 cup for your money and pay it off in one go (forgetting about interest rates from god knows when), knowing your not going to loose that much...Not that stupid really?...Oh yeah and have a lot of fun in the process! Isn't that what it's all about?

 

[Gorms]

What you're trying to say is it's all relative?? Fair enough. All I'm trying to say is you can get a lot of car in the 172 cup for your money and pay it off in one go (forgetting about interest rates from god knows when), knowing your not going to loose that much...Not that stupid really?...Oh yeah and have a lot of fun in the process! Isn't that what it's all about?

No not really. If i wanted an old car thats fun i would have got another mk2 golf (could buy 2 for the price of a nice 172) or maybe even gone for a mk1. But i didnt want an old car anymore as i was sick of paying for them to be repaired, and trust me i would never own a second hand french car after a bad experience with a citroen AX gt. I know 172s are a little more reliable but i just wanted peace of mind and i had the cash to get a new car.

But your point is seriously floored as you are comparing old and new which is like comparing standard v modified. Both cars are almost the same price new and you get a lot more toys on the 200 so i guess you get more for your money with the 200.

Gorms