Youre right they do.........so tell me!Quote: Originally posted by ESCOBAR on 05 January 2005
lol I have a 182 and a 1.2 16v dynamique and I find the dynamique to be pretty spritely for a 1.2, Especially after having a shot in the 1.2 8v clio, that was a snail - and I mean painfully slow. In fact it was so slow it was f**kin dangerous. The Dynamiques handling was great too. You really could chuck it round corners. I could almost throw that car about as much as my women (rag doll)
P.S Lets not hear any punto chat. I dont think these cars deserve a mention on such a prestigious website and I cant believe I heard the Ford word either especially when matched with the word Ka !!!!!!
Rflol
^^^^^ Someone needs to tell the man above me about maximum velocity
[Edited by ESCOBAR on 05 January 2005 at 9:59am]
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.
how fast is a 1.2 clio
- Thread starter docter fox
- Start date
Allan-
ClioSport Club Member
i would have to agree the 1.2 is quite nippy, well mine is easily although it tops out around 118
(verrified by mr police man on the m5)But i wont go into that now
and was a while back lolIf you chucked a 1.2 litre clio off a cliff next to a 1.2 clio with an elephant in it (what a brilliant idea), the race would go as follows....
In the first instance the cars would both accelerate at 9.8 metres per second (per second) due to the gravitational force acting upon them having little drag to overcome. However the closer the empty clio got to terminal velocity (150-170 mph... god knows
) the further the one with the elephant in it would pull ahead. With that much more mass (another 6 tonnes or so) being wrenched down by Newtons finest and an identical body shape - terminal velocity would be a fair bit higher
erm, no
the one with the elephant would get to a higher top speed!
sorry civic legend but youre wrong, terminal velocity is only affected by air resistance, which is determined by the shape and size of the object falling.
therefore, as you said both cars would accelerate at approximatley 9.8 metres per second until they reach an identical terminal velocity and both hit the floor at the same time.
a punto would beat them both though.
(a level physics)
doubt it mate...
if you made a feather shaped object out of cast iron and dropped it off the top of a tall building at the same time as a normal feather, which would you expect to hit the ground first! think about it
trust me mate, if they are the same size and shape then the weight is irrelevant, i have thought about it, mostly while studying for exams on the subject.
there was an experiment on the moon (no air resistance) where they dropped a feather and a lead ball from the same height and they hit the ground at the same time (we were forced to watch this on video).
acceleration due to gravity is constant no matter what the weight is and terminal velocity is only dependant on air resistance.
we have successfully hijacked this thread, do you think anyone noticed?
while on the topic of speed, my 1.4 MK1 RT, how quick is it?
i beat a new mini cooper off the lights to about 60-65, and i know he was trying coz hes my mate
, on a private test track of course![Edited by adamlister on 05 January 2005 at 12:08pm]
**Back to the topic guys
**didnt wanna have to do this...
http://hypertextbook.com/facts/JianHuang.shtmlhttp://hypertextbook.com/facts/JianHuang.shtml
chris c - nay bother! twas nice to have to engage my brain for a while anyway!
in response to all the clio 0-60 issues, why not check your very own forum car comparison section ???
Quote: Originally posted by Fred2001Dynamic on 05 January 2005
i know of a 1.2 16v clio that will upset many cups/172/182s around the track and also round the twisties!!!it all very well having the power, but if the car rolls like a fishing boat in the atlantic, you aint got sh*t TBH!!!slower cars better setup will 9/10times be quicker round the track
cough cough splutter!!!!, excuse me, ive just choked on my dinner!!!!, 2nd day back at work after xmas and thats the best laugh ive had all year!!!
ive just had a 1.2 over xmas as a coutesy car, they have no power whatsoever and handly like a balloon!!,, your superfast 1.2 will have to be heavily modifed to get anywhere near 172/182 etc... which in efffect means its not a 1.2!
Quote: Originally posted by GeeUK on 04 January 2005
Well, 1.2 Clios are nippy and faster to other 1.2s out there!
Some idiots think that if a car is 1.4 is it faster than a 1.2 16v, but alot of cars are 1.2 8v and only push like 60-65 BHP. Get smoking those Puntos and Polos from the lights
Well mine is 1.4 16v and it is a lot faster than the 1.2 lower down. I didnt think it would be but I have driven both and can tell a big difference.
same car as me and i wiish i had those extra 8 valvesQuote: Originally posted by POW_Clio on 05 January 2005
I have tried a 1.2 16V Clio and my 1.4 8V feels faster. I have managed 118MPH out of mine (where the law permits of course
The 1.4 8V and the 1.2 16V push out similar power (about 75bhp)
[Edited by POW_Clio on 05 January 2005 at 3:41am]
23ish BHP different
even though theyre the same BHP as the 1.2 16v i think theyre slightly quicker, must have slightly more torque. im sure someone will present the figures
Octavia VRS
^^ is that the difference between our 8V Alizes and a 16V one?Quote: Originally posted by entjm on 05 January 2005
same car as me and i wiish i had those extra 8 valvesQuote: Originally posted by POW_Clio on 05 January 2005
I have tried a 1.2 16V Clio and my 1.4 8V feels faster. I have managed 118MPH out of mine (where the law permits of course
The 1.4 8V and the 1.2 16V push out similar power (about 75bhp)
[Edited by POW_Clio on 05 January 2005 at 3:41am]
23ish BHP different
even though theyre the same BHP as the 1.2 16v i think theyre slightly quicker, must have slightly more torque. im sure someone will present the figures
I raised the point before about 1.4 8V and 1.2 16V and someone told me that the 1.4 has a better power to weight ratio.
BTW, I find it hard to believe a 1.2 16V (even if quite a bit modded) can keep up with Cups/172s/182s!!!
Remapped derv Golf
Na, Fred is just a nutter!
I cant keep with my friends 1.6 Astra SXi in the cup because hes a nutter to!I really upset a 17 years old in a Clio Prima whist im the works van a few weeks back.
I cant see a standard 1.2 being anywhere near a Sporting,VTR or Zetec-S once up to silly speeds.
yup.... 1.4 8v 75bhp 114Nm 0-60 11.7, 1.4 16v 98bhp 127Nm
for reference 1.2 16v 74bhp 105Nm 0-60 11.7
so i think the 8v will get off the like quicker than the 1.2 16v because of the torque but ultimately has the same top speed.
if my understanding is right the 1.4 8v has more torque than the 1.2 16v because it is a larger capacity engine.
now to put all that into perspective....
2.0 16v (182) 180bhp 200Nm 0-60 6.9
(all figures from parkers)
having driven a 1.2 16v Dynamique (51 reg in silver if you must) and a 172, Id have to say the 172 would have to be driven by a blind, very drunk and extremely nervous cretin to have any worries from the 1.2!! come on!!!! theres almost a 100 PS deficit! not to mention the wider track of the 172, the better/bigger tyres.
Saying that, I would love to see the video
lol bet its a tiny small tight track, lets see you keep up on normal roads B included, out of every bend the 182/172/cup would pull away so even if the man goes round the corners at the same speed - every time there is a straight the 182/172/cup would pull away, so im wondering about the definition of upset many cups/172/182s around the track and also round the twisties!!!
While on this matter "slower cars better setup will 9/10times be quicker round the track" lol,
The response faster cars even better set up will be 10/10 times quicker round the track
"(he obviously hasnt seen the video of me leaving the 172 around the track!)" - leaving a 172 round a track doesnt quite add up to assuming you will also leave a 182 or cup round a track - unless your racing jimmy cranky.
Anyway, rflol - cant believe im getting involved in this amusing competition.There are infinite variables but there is no reason why it is not possible.
I was pushing a Focus RS at Brands in my Clio 1.216v, i had track knowledge to my advantage but i made up for what, a 135bhp difference? My Clio just had a k-tec exhaust, coilovers and geometry changes.
I have driven with Dansta (172Cup) and NickyB(RSI) and they obiliterated me in a straightline but just going around a tight turn i could pull a gap.
Laugh all you like, its us who have the biggest laughs! Not any more for me though
-Rob
Quote: Originally posted by Fred2001Dynamic on 06 January 2005
Quote: Originally posted by admob on 05 January 2005Quote: Originally posted by Fred2001Dynamic on 05 January 2005 i know of a 1.2 16v clio that will upset many cups/172/182s around the track and also round the twisties!!!it all very well having the power, but if the car rolls like a fishing boat in the atlantic, you aint got sh*t TBH!!!slower cars better setup will 9/10times be quicker round the track
[/QUOTE]
cough cough splutter!!!!, excuse me, ive just choked on my dinner!!!!, 2nd day back at work after xmas and thats the best laugh ive had all year!!!
ive just had a 1.2 over xmas as a coutesy car, they have no power whatsoever and handly like a balloon!!,, your superfast 1.2 will have to be heavily modifed to get anywhere near 172/182 etc... which in efffect means its not a 1.2!
[/QUOTE]Wager my boy????(he obviously hasnt seen the video of me leaving the 172 around the track!)std engine with just exhaust
wow, someones got some guts to bet money against an unknown apponent!!!, FACT any 172/182 std will destroy a 1.2 down the start straight, by the time your doing 60 a 172 will be at 85 to 90. with the best handling mods, you might pull back a couple of car lengths at the first corner ( thats assuming theres a donut whos pissed driving the 172), at the next straight you will be further behind and so on and so on.. THE END!!!
Now bring into the equation that im not some young 18 yr old lad but instead have 15 yrs experience of driving fast cars VERY FAST!,
can we see this video of yours, find the identity of the 172 who has embarrassed us reno sport owners and banish him to some duff saxo forum where he obviously belongs!!!
Shhh
I had a 02 1.2 16v Clio before i got the 182. These are very good reliable cheap to run and insure cars...
Id more than happy go back down to the old clio again if i could never afford to run the 182. I use to get 110mph out the clio on the M62, and it would pick up quite quick if your in the car on your own.
I bought the car with 7 miles on the clock, sold it with nearly 33,000 on the clock, so i had my useage out of it in the 2 1/2 years i had it..and never had a serious trip halting problem..
Alias
Quote: Originally posted by RobFenn on 06 January 2005
There are infinite variables but there is no reason why it is not possible. I was pushing a Focus RS at Brands in my Clio 1.216v, i had track knowledge to my advantage but i made up for what, a 135bhp difference? My Clio just had a k-tec exhaust, coilovers and geometry changes.I have driven with Dansta (172Cup) and NickyB(RSI) and they obiliterated me in a straightline but just going around a tight turn i could pull a gap. Laugh all you like, its us who have the biggest laughs! Not any more for me though
-Rob Was it a radio controlled focus?!?!??!?!?!??!?!!!??????
Ive met arthritic deaf dumb blind disabled grannies with a hereditary lack of spatial awareness and their ankles tied together who could push their shoppys to the newsagents quicker than the 1.2!!!!
to say it could take on and BEAT a focus RS is just the most ridiculous statement. ROFLMAO LOLLOLOLOLLLOOOLL
Maybe the focus was on a warm up lap?
megane coupe F7R
LOl@ 1.2 will beat a rs focus or 182/cup.
Its not happening really is it. Next thing ya no, Jeremy clarkson will be tellin us all to buy 1.2 clio over a cup or 182 cuz a 1.2 will whoopem all. lol
The answer to your question is no! You will realise when you buy a faster car.
[Edited by Andyvalver on 06 January 2005 at 2:48pm]
A stock 172/182 will get beaten on a track by Freds 1.2 assuming the same driver in both cars. Anyway hp isnt everything even the all fabed stripped out Williams can when being raced on the track get overtaken by a lowly dci Ive seen it happen no funny engine mods just suspension work.
Anyway by the time you and fred ever met up fred you beat you in the straight infact why even waste the petrol appearing unless you have 300hp+ Cup race car.
Remapped derv Golf
Neither Robb or Fred are saying a 1.2 is quicker than a 172.
They are saying that in there experence theyve kept up with them round tracks. Once on a corner (under braking) having an extra 100bhp make no difference! Robb and Freds car both have upgraded brakes and springs which are far better than the ones on a standard 172.
Like I said before a LOT is down to how ball the driver balls (only an expression ladies) are!
My friend only has a 100bhp Astra but is totally mad and is a bit of a tasty lane driver. He was all over the back of a 330ci the other day - i kid you not.
Nothing to do with the car - Hes just mad!
And as far as the "why buy a 172 if the 1.4 is just as fast" this is only true up to bout 50-60 then my mates 172 will pull on me. But since I dont go faster than that anyways, for legal and sanity reasons, I dont need a 172 really!
And yes weve tried draggin up to 60 many a time and theres nothing in it really, just depends on grip and shift, past 50-60 his higher bhp really pushes it on, thats the difference!
