Quote: Originally posted by jonnyboy on 02 February 2004
hmmm. Im seeing a lot of green eyed monster in this post. Fact. The 182 will be better than the cup or 172, it simply has to be. IMO any car thats better than the 172 deserves all the positive reviews. If it wasnt for the tailpipes I might be tempted lol
Think its called sarcasmQuote: Originally posted by Rich-D on 02 February 2004
Err... Cup is 0-60 in 6.5secs so how is the 182 "much faster" then...Quote: Originally posted by James on 02 February 2004
6.7 sec or sommatSo what would the 0 -60 be ?
Oh so its much faster than the present Cup then. Thats good to know.
lol - I meant on TopGear or in a mag, but yours is definately an idea!Quote: Originally posted by Tomclio182 on 02 February 2004
lets do it mate sounds like fun to me win or lose.
No torque increase, but according to the figures Renault have published so far, it peaks slightly lower at 5250rpm (instead of 5400rpm i think).Quote: Originally posted by jongsr4 on 02 February 2004
sorry....can someone just confirm that there isnt any torque increase........this has thrown my choice of next car right out the window! there are so many quick clios to choose from! which is a good thing!
reno figures will prob say its the minority. u ask how many people on here have had 1 or all the above though!!Quote: Originally posted by 182 sport on 03 February 2004
So has every 172 /cup got these same problems or is it jusat half of them? coz i wouldnt know yet,am gettin mine next month
Wanna try driving a golf mate, by comparison the cup is perfectQuote: Originally posted by D-CUP on 03 February 2004
Im interested in the no-bodyroll flat handling described in the review. I think my Cup has too much bodyroll and Im guessing the normal 172 is worse.
Anyone got better scans?