Good natured ZR160 debate...

Rally Matt · Oct 20, 2004

Good Morning, you have a lively thread here!

Just to put a few things in perspective this is what my comments are based on and why I said them.

On a technical test track (Blyton) that is not a flat out flowing race circuit with special high grip asphalt the ZR was actually quicker. This was proven by 5 other professional race and rally drivers in addition to myself and as the Clio has more power and torque it was logical to assume the chassis was the reason why the ZR performed better. The cars were a standard MG ZR 160 3 dr and a Clio 172. Conditions were dry. We had a play with a 182 on a different ocaision, the ZR wasnt there and it was damp too so it was unfair to make a comparison, the 182 was slower than both the ZR and the 172, but we expected it to be owing to the conditions. A chappie from Regie UK also turned up with a v6 another time which was very quick!

For ref the brakes on a Group N car have to use O/E calipers and rotors, pads and fluid are free, jump hoses are recomended to protected (stainless braided are best) Master cylinder and servo where fitted must be O/E

The ZR 160 has 282mm front vents and 260mm rears. Single piston motorsport calipers as standard.

But back to my original point, a well driven ZR160 can beat a average driver in a Clio 182 on testing roads (not a motorway!) In just the same way a 182 in the right hands can spank a Subaru Imprezza

PJVTS · Oct 20, 2004

lol

jon_r · Oct 20, 2004

lol

Tom · Oct 20, 2004

Quote: Originally posted by Rally Matt on 20 October 2004

Good Morning, you have a lively thread here!

Just to put a few things in perspective this is what my comments are based on and why I said them.

On a technical test track (Blyton) that is not a flat out flowing race circuit with special high grip asphalt the ZR was actually quicker. This was proven by 5 other professional race and rally drivers in addition to myself and as the Clio has more power and torque it was logical to assume the chassis was the reason why the ZR performed better. The cars were a standard MG ZR 160 3 dr and a Clio 172. Conditions were dry. We had a play with a 182 on a different ocaision, the ZR wasnt there and it was damp too so it was unfair to make a comparison, the 182 was slower than both the ZR and the 172, but we expected it to be owing to the conditions. A chappie from Regie UK also turned up with a v6 another time which was very quick!

For ref the brakes on a Group N car have to use O/E calipers and rotors, pads and fluid are free, jump hoses are recomended to protected (stainless braided are best) Master cylinder and servo where fitted must be O/E

The ZR 160 has 282mm front vents and 260mm rears. Single piston motorsport calipers as standard.

But back to my original point, a well driven ZR160 can beat a average driver in a Clio 182 on testing roads (not a motorway!) In just the same way a 182 in the right hands can spank a Subaru Imprezza

Oh i see your point now.

i apologise. *rolls eyes*

peterh2 · Oct 20, 2004

Any of you ZR lads going to be at any trackdays soon with standard examples?

DaveLiquid182 · Oct 20, 2004

ZR Rover C*$^

Mad_Marky · Oct 20, 2004

Quote: Originally posted by Rally Matt on 20 October 2004

Good Morning, you have a lively thread here!

Just to put a few things in perspective this is what my comments are based on and why I said them.

On a technical test track (Blyton) that is not a flat out flowing race circuit with special high grip asphalt the ZR was actually quicker. This was proven by 5 other professional race and rally drivers in addition to myself and as the Clio has more power and torque it was logical to assume the chassis was the reason why the ZR performed better. The cars were a standard MG ZR 160 3 dr and a Clio 172. Conditions were dry. We had a play with a 182 on a different ocaision, the ZR wasnt there and it was damp too so it was unfair to make a comparison, the 182 was slower than both the ZR and the 172, but we expected it to be owing to the conditions. A chappie from Regie UK also turned up with a v6 another time which was very quick!

For ref the brakes on a Group N car have to use O/E calipers and rotors, pads and fluid are free, jump hoses are recomended to protected (stainless braided are best) Master cylinder and servo where fitted must be O/E

The ZR 160 has 282mm front vents and 260mm rears. Single piston motorsport calipers as standard.

But back to my original point, a well driven ZR160 can beat a average driver in a Clio 182 on testing roads (not a motorway!) In just the same way a 182 in the right hands can spank a Subaru Imprezza

So now you have to be a professional driver in a ZR160 to beat a clio 182? So surely you in the 182 and Tom in the ZR you would spank him even more?

Daipac · Oct 20, 2004

I will say one thing about the MGs, they cant half play football going by the new adverts !

Tom · Oct 20, 2004

That is true.

Rally Matt · Oct 20, 2004

So now you have to be a professional driver in a ZR160 to beat a clio 182? So surely you in the 182 and Tom in the ZR you would spank him even more?

Very possibly! But the starting point of this thread over on the XPOWER forum was partly about if the car was being driven by a more able driver it would make up the power shortfall. I know from much experience that quite a large power shortage can be overcome via differences in ability, particulaly when its a challenging test track not just a pointless blast!

But as the test was all done by drivers that I know what their level and I respect their coments etc it was a fairer comparison. One of the underlying coments was how the ZR chassis could handle much more power. All the drivers felt the rear end control on the ZR was better than the Clio, albeit very marginal between the 2. The Clio suffers with having inclined dampers that give it short travel affect the springing/damping rates whereas the ZR has more effective upright struts at the rear. The ZR has a marginally wider track and longer wheel base that is virually the optimum for stability. Rear end braking on the ZR was more controlable, I think its partly down to bigger rear discs and more weight over the back as well as a softer suspension setting, allowing the driver to balance the car more accurately through corners. The comments we were throwing between us are the product of yaers of testing sessions etc and setting compettition cars up (These were purely stock road cars)

Problem with most motor mags now is they are entertainment, not really anything of substance. The writers are just that, writers and they might have years driving cars but as some one pointed out earlier, driving lots of cars doesnt make you any good! I think you will find virtually all race and rally drivers of all levels look at car journos with distain, they are not professionals!

On a different tack, has anyone tried putting the "Quickshift 5" system in a 172/182 yet? I worked on the launch for it, seemed pretty good but lots of quality issues with the cars but dealers told us that was "Normal" It would seem a potentially effective sequential shift system that allows flat changes!

telford_mike · Oct 20, 2004

This was at Blyton Park yeah?

Youd be better off in a Land Rover if my experience of that place is anything to go by. Its like a training centre for pot-hole repairers.

Tom · Oct 20, 2004

The quick shift 5 system was never designed to fit to anything with more than 100lbs/ft of torque.

It would explode.

Its never allowed flat changes! and its not very effective!

(mainly developed for city dwellers and the like)

Maybe your confused with the cliocup racers sadev sequential box.

Lagerlout · Oct 20, 2004

Erm the guy who put the 182 above the CTR, Focus ST170, MCS, Pug GTi 180 (dont think the ZR was considered a worthy opponent) is a proffesional driver still competing on the world stage. In fact, hes not long had a podium finish in a Saleen in the GTS class around the Nurburgring 1000kms.

But I guess there is no way hed know more about cars (and more importantly going quickly) than 5 tap room specialists operating out of some tin-pot track in britain.

jon_r · Oct 20, 2004

Phil Bennett. Or is he another racing driver who rates the Clio?

Lagerlout · Oct 20, 2004

Spot on Jon. But your right, there are many others.....

iceblue182 · Oct 20, 2004

Quote: Originally posted by Tom on 19 October 2004Quote: Originally posted by Rally Matt on 19 October 2004"Count me out mines modded, but i can borrow a std one."<FONT color=#000000>Is that a yes or a no then?Its a yes. Sorry i couldnt make that more glaringly obvious.[/QUOTE]

mines free!

its standard and i dont Care if you crash it! (whilst winning of course!)

actually ill do it my prospective father in law is an engineer at mg rover id love too make him eat his words!
[Edited by iceblue182 on 10/20/2004 12:15:58 PM]

PJVTS · Oct 20, 2004

PMSL & iceblue172!

iceblue182 · Oct 20, 2004

Quote: Originally posted by PJVTS on 20 October 2004
<FONT style="BACKGROUND-COLOR: #407db6">PMSL & iceblue172!

its 182 thanks!!!! ;o)

blink172 · Oct 20, 2004

This is a comedy thread. It appears that it started off with 110bhp clios getting tonked by 160bhp MGs, now its a std 172 vs a std 160 MG or a std 172 vs a 200bhp group N MG. Im starting to get lost in all the figures.

According to every mag around worth reading, the RS clios (whichever variation it may be) is the best value hatch you can buy. Pound for Pound in its class its unmatched, only being matched by Megane class cars (And still doing very well thank you please).

Im sorry, i dont know you matt, but i dont believe what your saying. Professional drivers and motoring journos always comment on how well planted the clios feel and that when it does break away its easy to bring back under control. And if it isnt the case, why isnt the MG featured in any of the shoot outs?

Lagerlout · Oct 20, 2004

Because the tests are usually aimed at new cars... <snigger>

Tom · Oct 20, 2004

Thats not fair in 1988 it was new!

TheJesus · Oct 20, 2004

agree with Blink172... Im getting a nose full of BS. Make yer minds up, which fekkin Clio did you drive/race... its pretty easy to mistake a 172 for a 1.2 especially from the back... sure you MG boys aint just trying to justify your purchase?

TBH I couldnt give a ratts ass what some pretentious tw*t in a magazine says about something, ill make my own mind up. But higher power and torque to weight suggests to most people that one car will be a lot quicker than the other, especially as the speeds rise. Other thing is that the 172 is smaller and more squat, so what if the MG has a slightly wider track, its a bigger car, its like comparing a 7 Series to a Punto (okay, maybe not quite

). Last point is that you own an MG and drive it daily, correct? How much experience have you had with the 172? I dont believe it to be that much, too many things you say dont quite add up, sorry m8, just my opinion.

y0z2a · Oct 20, 2004

I have collected and framed all of my clio scalps last year, i quite fancy a few mg badges on the wall.

Lets get a trackday next spring... and I am not talking about a quick y0z2aSport day at Curborough.

Lets do Oulton or something to give the old b****cks a bit of a tweak to get the adrenalin going.

or do we have to do something sensible?

/y0z

Turkish · Oct 20, 2004

Quote: Originally posted by y0z2a on 20 October 2004

Lets do something to give the old b****cks a bit of a tweak

or do we have to do something sensible?

/y0z

ooooo im moist just thinking about it. come here you big stud

J182 · Oct 20, 2004

Just a quote from this weeks autocar regarding the 182 cup,

If you prefer your hot hatches to have supreme performance rather then civility nothing gets close!

Rally Matt · Oct 20, 2004

Quote: Originally posted by TheJesus on 20 October 2004

TBH I couldnt give a ratts ass what some pretentious tw*t in a magazine says about something, ill make my own mind up. But higher power and torque to weight suggests to most people that one car will be a lot quicker than the other, especially as the speeds rise. Other thing is that the 172 is smaller and more squat, so what if the MG has a slightly wider track, its a bigger car, its like comparing a 7 Series to a Punto (okay, maybe not quite ). Last point is that you own an MG and drive it daily, correct? How much experience have you had with the 172? I dont believe it to be that much, too many things you say dont quite add up, sorry m8, just my opinion.

If you check out the figures there aint much in it between a ZR and Clio on size and weight, that is of course if you trust respective manufacturers data!

As for a shoot out I am very happy. Blyton is where we tested them, its not the smoothest place in the world but more testing than most race circuits and, also I can get it arranged cheap. Cadwell would be another choice. Or there are some *tut tut*

I am away in Mexico for 3 weeks until early Dec so after then is ok for me or after mid Jan to end of Feb after that I am pretty much booked. PM with what you decide.

[Edited by Tom on 20 October 2004 at 2:05pm]

Turkish · Oct 20, 2004

oops he mentioned competative driving on the roads, surely a breach of the rules

Tom · Oct 20, 2004

Yup. shall i ban him?

Turkish · Oct 20, 2004

nah, its more fun if you just remove the reference tom

st33ly · Oct 20, 2004

Do it! Do it! Yeah, do it!

blink172 · Oct 20, 2004

At night no less! Such a blatant disregard for public and livestocks safety....

All you need to solve it is a 10 lap head to head in std cars, regardless of circuit.

Turkish · Oct 20, 2004

or just send the details of his favourite road for driving like an arse on to the police, lol

phunkey_monkeh · Oct 20, 2004

Quote: Originally posted by Tom on 20 October 2004
Yup. shall i ban him?

Nah.
In all fairness to the guy, and despite some abuse towards him, hes been very civil in return. (excluding the clown remark lol

)

y0z2a · Oct 20, 2004

Quote: Originally posted by Rally Matt on 20 October 2004
Quote: Originally posted by TheJesus on 20 October 2004 TBH I couldnt give a ratts ass what some pretentious tw*t in a magazine says about something, ill make my own mind up. But higher power and torque to weight suggests to most people that one car will be a lot quicker than the other, especially as the speeds rise. Other thing is that the 172 is smaller and more squat, so what if the MG has a slightly wider track, its a bigger car, its like comparing a 7 Series to a Punto (okay, maybe not quite

). Last point is that you own an MG and drive it daily, correct? How much experience have you had with the 172? I dont believe it to be that much, too many things you say dont quite add up, sorry m8, just my opinion.[/QUOTE]If you check out the figures there aint much in it between a ZR and Clio on size and weight, that is of course if you trust respective manufacturers data!As for a shoot out I am very happy. Blyton is where we tested them, its not the smoothest place in the world but more testing than most race circuits and, also I can get it arranged cheap. Cadwell would be another choice. Or there are some *tut tut*I am away in Mexico for 3 weeks until early Dec so after then is ok for me or after mid Jan to end of Feb after that I am pretty much booked. PM with what you decide.

[Edited by Tom on 20 October 2004 at 2:05pm]

Matt,

I would be really up for this...

I imagine you have done cadwell a few times before.

/y0z

iceblue182 · Oct 20, 2004

^^^ If you check out the figures there aint much in it between a ZR and Clio on size and weight, that is of course if you trust respective manufacturers data!

uh 160 158bhp 128lb/ft 1090kg 7.4 sec 147bhp/tonne

182 179bhp 148lb/ft 1080kg 6.6 168 bhp/tonne

12% more power and about the same in torque.

12% is a lot!!!! *shakes head*

Rally Matt · Oct 20, 2004

Quote: Originally posted by iceblue182 on 20 October 2004

^^^ If you check out the figures there aint much in it between a ZR and Clio on size and weight, that is of course if you trust respective manufacturers data!

uh 160 158bhp 128lb/ft 1090kg 7.4 sec 147bhp/tonne

182 179bhp 148lb/ft 1080kg 6.6 168 bhp/tonne

12% more power and about the same in torque.

12% is a lot!!!! *shakes head*

Did you miss the reference to size and weight?

Yozza, only been to Cadwell once before, took a Cinqucento Sporting round a few times, semed a reasonable circuit to have fun on, most others are too boring.

Maybe the handling circuit at Millbook of the Alpine circuit?

Daipac · Oct 20, 2004

That Clown comment was a bit unfair I thought !

http://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1098279006__Clowns.jpg

Sorry, couldnt resist..............

ESCOBAR · Oct 20, 2004

lol- i had a look at the mgs and i mean the mg range cos my women likes them, however. On this occassion I put my foot down and said " Women! NO! you are nor driving a rover" "youve had your look and so have I and I really cant hang about any longer in case someone I know recognises me" So off to pug we went - Gti 180. tsssk that looks like a chav mobile, luckily the women agreed, so - Off to renault. 172, "Oh that is quite nice but im not sure" TEST DRIVE 182, women" Oh I like it can we get it? can we ?can we?" Needless to say - bought it there and then. Now she doesnt get to drive it cos I do so she gets the V70

ps. ^^^^^^^apology accepted

[Edited by ESCOBAR on 20 October 2004 at 2:30pm]

y0z2a · Oct 20, 2004

Cadwell should be a good laugh.

will let you know when the car is sorted

good luck.

/y0z

Lagerlout · Oct 20, 2004

Clio 1.2 vs ZR160? Not much of a match really...

[Edited by lagerlout1 on 20 October 2004 at 2:50pm]

I wonder if Freds will be ready by then??....lol

Good natured ZR160 debate...

peterh2

Similar threads