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.
Good natured ZR160 debate...
- Thread starter Dave
- Start date
Well you certainly love your Clios!
As you will see from what I was saying over on the XPOWER site, I think the Clio is an impressive car however it has got some issues on handling that I believe the ZR copes with much better.
Yes in a straight acceleration fight the Clio will be faster and on most race circuits that are flowing. However at Blyton where the Clio scholarship was originally held the ZR was quicker. The circuit is much more technical than any race circuit and is really a asphalt rally stage circuit so mid range and sudden change of direction and balance is more appropriate.
The customer scholarship cars were 1.6 Clios, and quite flat ones at that too! But various other Clios made appearances and were tried along with a ZR 160. The verdicts were from a range of different proffesional drivers from circuit and rally disciplines. It wasnt a massive technical test but was accurate enough to give solid evidence.
I dont claim to be a driving god, but I am a proffesional rally driver for MG and also instruct at quite a few race and rally schools in the UK and abroad. My usual "Company" car for office work is a 200bhp ZR 160 Gr N from MG S&R not a road car pretending.
There are some good points raised in both forums. Clio brakes are good but we found the ZR ones even better. Have you seen the size of the discs they use!
If anyone is interested in having the definative test I can arrange use of the Blyton track for a reasonable sum.
Standard cars only though, no cheating! Being only a "Novice Driver" I am sure you would all be much quicker than me anyway!
Tom
ClioSport Club Member
EV (s)
Quote: Originally posted by Rally Matt on 19 October 2004
Well you certainly love your Clios!
It being a clio site...
As you will see from what I was saying over on the XPOWER site, I think the Clio is an impressive car however it has got some issues on handling that I believe the ZR copes with much better.
Like?
Yes in a straight acceleration fight the Clio will be faster and on most race circuits that are flowing. However at Blyton where the Clio scholarship was originally held the ZR was quicker. The circuit is much more technical than any race circuit and is really a asphalt rally stage circuit so mid range and sudden change of direction and balance is more appropriate.
Well if the cars used were 1.6 dynamiques then i dont doubt it
The customer scholarship cars were 1.6 Clios, and quite flat ones at that too! But various other Clios made appearances and were tried along with a ZR 160. The verdicts were from a range of different proffesional drivers from circuit and rally disciplines. It wasnt a massive technical test but was accurate enough to give solid evidence.
What clios? 1.2s? Dcis?
I dont claim to be a driving god, but I am a proffesional rally driver for MG and also instruct at quite a few race and rally schools in the UK and abroad. My usual "Company" car for office work is a 200bhp ZR 160 Gr N from MG S&R not a road car pretending.
That is odd, clearly you are biased to your MG but not seeing how much better a clio 172 is over a std zr160 makes me question your logic.
There are some good points raised in both forums. Clio brakes are good but we found the ZR ones even better. Have you seen the size of the discs they use!
No. are you going to tell us?
If anyone is interested in having the definative test I can arrange use of the Blyton track for a reasonable sum.
Count me out mines modded, but i can borrow a std one.
Christ EVo quoted the clio brakes to be the best they have tested!! out braking a Caterham super light!! pmsl!!
How can the zr brakes be better!!
My sis has a zr 160 its an awesome sounding engine as is the 172 - but not in a million years would the 160 be sitiing on the bumper of a 172!
last year i had a vts and my friend works for MG and had a green 160 as demo i was intrigued on the diffrence between the zr 160 and my 130bhp VTS - seing as my brother in law top be - had just got one with my sis.
Anyways after some runway action i hate to say i was glued firmley to one car lenght of the 160 from the start i didnt beat it and i certainly didnt expect to but - it was a shocking suprise for the pair of us!
The zr IS a good car but im affraid cannot be compared to the 172 - the MG is clearly outclassed by the 172 in all aspects! read the magazine reviews and the stats.
Saying that i do like the 160 im just commenting to the comparision of these two cars!
But hey at the end of the day theres a lot of biast opinions and youll never get an agrrement between the two! everyone will be patriotic to there car.
Pete
But i now have the trusty 172 which is in another league to the vts nuff said!
i was just wondering how clueless all the motoring journalists who did the hothatch shoot outs over the last few years and always cite the 172/ctr and cooper s as the best you can buy with the seat ibiza cupra 206 gti and mg zrs as poor runner up are. when buying my 172 i drove most of the competition but tbh couldnt stand the looks or the hideous ancient interior of the MG so never even bothered but from any of the MGs ive had a head to head with on the road ive always out gunned them on the straights and on the bends so i would still say i made the right choice with my cash.
Silver Fabia vRS
Quote: Originally posted by BluePete on 19 October 2004
Do a search for a Clio Super 1600, little more than 110hpQuote: Originally posted by peterh2 on 19 October 2004
He is probably getting confused. Not surprised there 160bhp cars are faster round a track than a 110bhp clio. Would be a totally different story against a Renault sport clio though
They arent the Super 1600 ones either, they are Dynamiques with some suspension mods from what I remember reading in the literature.
Im not a proffesional driver. Very average at best. I test drove the MG ZR 160 before I bought my 172 (first clue). Here are my thoughts.
1. The interior is worse than the Clio. The build quality and finish (beleive it or not!) are worse than the Clio.
2. The brakes were f**king gash. How anyone could rate them as better than the Clio is beyond me. All Fade and no Feel.
3. The handling isnt that bad. But the ride is terrible. Really harsh and crashy. And that highlights the poor finish. (the dashboard creaked everytime I went round a bend.)
4. They dont look too bad, if a bit Halfordish. Nice wheels.
5. Its not a slow car. Dont think it would be that far behind the Clios. (but far enough). Engine is revvy, and sounds OK.
6. The salesman new more about the car than I did. Which makes a refreshing change compared to my local Renault salesmen.
7. It s a Rover, and your mates will never let you forget it.
8. The spoiler appeared to made from papier mache and superglue. I thought it was going to fall off when I shut the boot.
9. I wouldnt thank you if you gave me one for free.
10. I bought the Clio.
Its faster (doesnt matter by how much, its IS faster), its better put together (which in itself tells you how bad the MG is) it handles better, the brakes are better. And its not a Rover.
[Edited by lagerlout1 on 19 October 2004 at 4:31pm]
"Count me out mines modded, but i can borrow a std one."
Is that a yes or a no then?
Scholarship Clios were totally standard 1.6 Dynamics, not even modified suspension!
Other clios were 172, 182 and a V6 provided by Renault themselves.
Quote: Originally posted by Yugguy on 19 October 2004
Ive driven the ZS180, cracking car, proof you CAN make a silk purse out of a sows ear.
This is so true. I never thought Id be doing anything with a Rover 45 other than laughing at it. I swapped my 172 mk1 for an MG ZS180 7 months ago and its easily as good as the comments that people have made about it on this thread (apart from the person who said its boring
).The dashboard might look a bit gash, and the lurid colours and bodykits are definitely not going to be to everyones tastes, but the ZS180 is one of the most under-rated cars I know of. Oh yeah, the interior doesnt rattle, squeak, fall apart etc, which is the reason I got fed up of my mk1 172 and sold it. And if anyone doesnt know what double wishbone suspension looks like....you do now:
http://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1098201522__Image532.jpg
Back on topic...there were a lot of ZRs (no 160s though) at the Xpower Curborough trackday earlier this year, and they acquitted themselves very well indeed. I had the honour of a passenger ride around the course with the production car lap record holder in a 1.4 ZR. Okay the driver was excellent, but he went round at full tilt with 3 passengers with no nasty understeer. If I didnt know it was a 1.4, Id have assumed it was a faster car.
Rhys
Well Group N is supposed to be production cars, so different springs/dampers and exhausts/management are allowed. Doubt theyd be much more with the MG as isnt in the F1400 class? XR Scholarship or something? Anyway, still going to be better than a 1.6 Clio (have same brakes as the 1.2!)
-Rob
Quote: Originally posted by jon_r on 19 October 2004
Like to add Rhys, the latest "incarnation" ZS in 180 form looks the business as well. Had the pleasure of driving one all round Millbrook last year and thoroughly enjoyed myself.
I think theyve really nailed it with that new 180. If it wasnt for the fact they depreciate like a b*****d from new, Id have one.
big fat japanese bus
Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha thats funny and true!
Lets not fight about hits people According to every magazine out ther who drive thousands of cars the clio has come out on top.
THe ZR is a great car and a lot of fun but the clio is simply better. Full stop.
I know some people sl*g the ZR because it started off life as a old rover rover but come on the clio sport is a grannys shopping car with a big engine in it if we are being honest.
Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 19 October 2004
Quote: Originally posted by TheJesus on 19 October 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 19 October 2004
I think you lot are being a bit harsh on the ZR. - nah
It weighs more, has less power and less torque but would still hold onto a 172. Not saying it would beat it, but a 172 would defo not be losing it. -
Jesus, ie motorway blast. There would hardly be anything in it, a 160 would be in close range of a 172 bumper.
Im going from personal experience in the Williams here and yeah I can leave 172s, but theres not a great deal in it... well, until it gets over the 100mph mark where I leave em for dead. I cant see a car with less power and torque and more weight being close at all, especially as the speed rise is all. Whats the power to weight of the 172 and 160?
158/128 vs 170/147........The 172 is lighter also. - you saying the ZR is somehow faster? lmao
Who said anything of the kind? Better power/more torque and a lighter car suggests a bashing to the other. It doesnt!
You dont know that though unless you have been able to have a side by side rolling/standing start... any takers?
IMO it looks a lot better than the clio and its handling/brakes are also a match for the 172. - I seriously doubt the handling is better, I would be very surprised if it could even keep within sight of the 172 round a track.
I never mentioned better handling, i said would match. To add to this argument, i have here in front of me an old autocar review from 05/03. It was a review of the best hot hatches for under £15k, remember?? The ZR160 actually got rated quite badly, due to the interior/driving position etc but when it came down to lap times, it done quite well. The clio cup lapped in 1min 27.03 and the ZR160 lapped in 1 min 29.09 so 2 secs in it between cup and ZR. If you take into account that this was a cup and not a 172 then that 2 sec will shrink to maybe 1/2 sec. Like i said a ZR will hold onto a 172 round a track and it will certainly keep in sight. Facts like these speak a thousand words.
LOL, 2 seconds per lap is a BIG difference! After the race finishes the MG would have been lapped a few times!
172cup and 182 are a different story however and the ZR160 would struggle. - how can near identical cars be a different story, theres f**k all difference between em all... Cup looks the best by far though.
Near identical cars?? Try telling that to the cup owners.
Fair point there pal! lol
Renault Clio 172 Ph2
a mg zr doing a 172 or 182, lmfao. all i need to say really.
I attend the Xpowerforums, LEDA track days so I know a few of the guys that post on the forum. I also had a passenger ride with either Matt or Miles (dont remember,lol) at the rally car action day at Castle Combe.
I dont want to get involved in a ZR vs Clio debate, but for those of you such as Rob that doubt Matt driving ability I really think you should pay the 30quid and have a passenger ride at the next rally car day if Matt and Miles attend. Then you might respect the guys opinion a little more. I am not saying you will agree or that he is right, but you might not belittle his opinion so much.
Joe
