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!

How much will a turbo cost me

  Audi S3 225

Ive got a clio2 1.2 16v, 2001 y reg. I wanted to get an engine conversion but cant be arsed with the hassle now. Instead i wanna get a turbo and n0s!

I got a pipercoss induction kit and powerflow custom twin exit zorst. But now with my 17 inch league rims and my ice install my cars started to go well slow!

Anyway, at the moment i just wanna get some prices and any information on turbos, how much faster will my car go and how much will it affect my insurance?

Any feedback will be appreciated.
  Nissan R35 GT-R

Why would you want to get a turbo AND Nitrous?

You said that you cant be arsed with the hassle of an engine conversion, but I think you should have a look at a few of the posts that Joe has made about turbocharging his 172 - its a serious project.

It will be far cheaper to start off with a fast car in the first place, and as for nitrous, I really dont think a 1.2 is engineered to take the kind of stresses that Nitrous will create.

Nos can be used to assist lag reduction, but in a properly designed system the lag should not be an issue.

a rough guide.. to do it properly.. 4-6k


Re: Frostys reply.

I agree with your thoughts on the turbo conversion, it is a very big job, and it would be easier to do an engine conversion, although his intention might be to create something different. How many 1.2 16v Turbo Clios are there? For this reason alone Id say go for it. It is amazing how much more respect you get for having something individual, and a small engined quick car. I managed to play with a Skyline GTR at Trax in my 1.4 (track prepared) Nova, and eventually passed it. Everyone including the Skyline boffs were amazed it was only a 1.4 and were very impressed. It gives a great sense of personal achievement if it is your own creation.

I disagree with your comment that the 1.2 would not be engineered to take Nitrous. If installed properly and used correctly there will be no problem. As long as there is no detonation or missuse in high gears at low RPM then youll be fine. 25bhp and probably 50bhp, wont be a problem. People tune NA engines to this degree all of the time. Weve increased power on our 1.4 from 100bhp to 185bhp with only de-seeming and shot peening and stronger big end bolts.


i think what everyone is getting at is that there is more to it than just converting the engine, you would also have to upgrade the suspension, the brakes, possably the wheels (for the brakes) so it would work out more expensive and the insurance would class it as highly tuned (by adding 80% more power) and reliability may be an issue.

As has been said by Frosty, its probably better to go to a quicker car with this setup to start with (and more goodies inside ;):D) and it wont cost you the earth compared to tuning a 1.2.


If everyone thought like that, thered be no modified cars. the main attraction to me through the years, is creating something, not just buying it. What car do you drive? Have you driven one of the Clio Sport Dynamiques hard? If you had, youd realise that the brakes and suspension are very good. It has the ABS, BA and EBD. It has sports suspension and a close ratio steering rack. It has a close ratio box, sports seats, trip computer etc etc etc.... Its not a bad car to play with. OK it lacks a little torque. As with any car, changing the engine from standard will always affect relaibility, but people have been doing it in all forms for years.

Coming from the Nova world, I used to get the same comments when I modified 1.4s and 1.6s. they used to say that I should just slap in a 2.0 16v. I didnt because I wanted to be different, and when people whitnessed what could be done, a lot of people changed there opinions. I used to drive an Old Nova not because I couldnt afford to buy anything faster, like a 172, but because I wanted to build something fast that was different and was my own creation. the sense of satisfaction when you wipe the floor with a so called fast car is indescribable.

Entering 1/4 mile competitions highlights this. Ive organised many by grouping engine classes together. The sense of jubilation was as great for the winner of the 1.2 class as the 2.0 class. You cant be the quickest outright, but you can be the best for what youve got.

Everyone needs a little encouragement, belittling someones ambitions and ideas is cruel no matter who they are or what they drive. He asked a question on the cost of turbos and Nitrous, and instead of offering advice you blatently said it aint worth it.

Now, Ive built many cars, some very fast, I know how to drive, and have had alot of track experience, and in my honest opinion, I believe that the chassis, suspension and brakes of the 1.2 16v Dynamique, are not only very good, but are also capable of coping with the demands of a great deal more torque and bhp. If you can sort the engine, then youll have quite a capable package.


whats a close ratio steering rack?

I doubt if any clio has a quick steering rack to start with (if you see the price of one you will know why) and the gearbox will be exactly the same as the standard 1.2 16v so no changes there.

Suspension will be down to Renault changing the springs to harder ones, your shocks will probably be the same as the standard 1.2s.

Performance wise, it would be cheaper and better to go out and buy the 1.6ltr 16v than tune the 1.2ltr as it would cost you less and give you just as much as rewarding a drive (if not better) than a car whos engine your going to be pushing to the limit of its abilities by turbo charging it!

You can also forget about ABS, BA and EBD, these are toys that make you think that a car is safer, this is why more people drive closer and faster on the motorways as its giving you a false sense of security, the fact is, is the only real way your going to get security on the roads is by keeping your distance and driving within your limits, dont be fooled by terms like "sports suspension, ABS etc" its all hype that sells cars, you can die just as easily now as you could 30-40 years ago driving.

Track experience... LOL!
Sorry, but road driving and track driving are 2 completely different kettle of fish.

Firstly, if you ever drove on a road like you drive on a track you would kill someone as you would be on the wrong side of the road most of the time trying to take the apexs of the corners, it does nothing for you except make you think your a better driver (and i also have a mate who is an ex pro racing driver and he says exactly this, even says hes not the best driver in the world on roads too! and that people who do trackdays often over estimate their abilities).

If i were you i would invest in IAM courses, they will teach you more about roads than any track day will.

So, what have we sorted out here..... modify a 1.2ltr or go and buy a 1.6ltr which will have the same power as a modded 1.2ltr? (and cost you less to insure!)

1.6ltr please!


Oh dear.

What misconceptions you have. Yes the sport range does have a close ratio rack (quick rack as they are sold after market). If you dont believe me, check it out. It has about 2 turns less than most standard systems. The 1.6 16v will have the same level of suspension and brake equiptment as the 1.2. Your argument falls apart there. Im not disagreeing that starting with a 1600 is beneficial over a 1.2. Thats commen sense. The point you miss is that the guy already has the latter. What if he is tied into three years of finance? Alot of people are. It would cost a fortune to get out of that. The point Im getting at is this isnt constructive in helping the guy. Its no different to telling someone thats thinking of having a makeover not to bother, go out and get a better face to start with.

Please dont critisise my knowledge of driving. I have had professional tuition, and have been driving foralmost 10 years on and off the track. That was not the point I was making. I know that track and road are completely different, and I too would say that Im not particullarly rapid on the road. I back off long before most and build in extra safety margins to compensate for those that dont, and because as I have aged, I have had an increased perception of risk! The point I was getting at was that With my experience of track use and car preperation, I know what makes a car handle well. The 1.2 16v probably wouldnt survive on a track, but on the country roads of England, with the bumps and potholes, it has a compromise that enables handling without shooting you accross the road everytime you hit a rutt. The track car I use at the moment is superb on flat tarmac, yet get it out on the road and its all over the place. Point to point I reckon the Clio would put it to shame.

Lets focus on the point. No matter what car you think he should buy, he has a 1.2. If you dont think Turbocing is a good idea, fair enough. I said the same. I said that an engine transplant would be as easy. It would be more reliable, have further tuning potential and would probably cost less. Im not a huge fan of Turbos myself, I have always prefered NA engines. A possible idea would to be fit a larger engine, possibly 1600 as you mention, or maybe a 1400. Then you could move down the route of throttle bodies.
  Nissan R35 GT-R


So youre the owner of that Nova then :) Theres been a bit of talk about you on the GTR register. Ive heard its a bit of a monster!

The thing with Novas is that there are loads of off the shelf products for them, but youll struggle to find any for a 1.2 Clio. So brakes, suspension etc are all problems. As said, there is no question that chassis setup is an issue that needs addressing. If the 1.2s chassis is so good then they wouldnt have redesigned the steering rack and suspension for the 172!

With regards to N20: Factory 1.2 Clio engines are NOT engineered to take any kind of forced induction. Im not saying it cannot be done, Im saying that engines like this should under-go some blueprinting first, otherwise youll find that come 50,000 miles, their rotating assemblies will be hammered to bits!

Just my 2p worth ;)


Yep, that was me. I was closing on the other Skyline too, but ran out of time. It was the first time I had driven that car in anger.

OK, will admit the 172 is better, not saying it isnt, but compare the 1.2 to the others not only in its class, but others of so called higher spec, and youll find its well suited. My wife hates it, she says the steering is to light and its twitchy. I like it.

Yep forced induction will put stress on an engine like the 1.2, and if you wanted to TC it, youd be wise to strenghen the bottom end whilst your in there sorting out the compression. I agree its a big job, and Id rather have the same horsepower from a larger cc NA engine. Nitrous also is the same in principal as it increases the compression, thats why its only suited to a certain type of person with mechanical sympathy.

SO to sum up Frosty, I agree with your points.



nice to see you can get 185bhp out of a nova ;) but lightened and strengthened your car will have a very good power to weight ratio which is what really counts!

Basically for what Jonesy wants to do it isnt worth throwing the money into, the costs would outweigh any gains elsewhere but you would be individual, the major down side is, is that if you wanted to do anything else you would need a bigger engine, something you could have got with the money you threw into the car to start with thus really negating the project in the first place.....

As for NO2, yuk..... not a favourite of mine due to the fact that it does more damage than good in the wrong hands (and most people dont know how to use it properly) and especially on a turbo charged engine where the benefits are outweighed by the fact fitting a bigger turbo works out cheaper! (and safer) plus NO2 has 2 properties, oxygen (which gives you the good burn) plus nitrogen (which cools), most people just look at the oxygen part but that nitrogen does actually do what it says, cools, sounds good but can have adverse affects!

Quick racks.... not a cheap option on a car and i know of very few cars that have these fitted as standard (one for my car costs 1566 quid!) but its something that a driver would find very hard to use as slight movement of the wheel would be the same as a car moving the wheel around to say 90 degrees. The turning circle on the other hand is different to a quick rack (i think this is what you meant in the first place ;) ) as all clios have the same circle where as a quick racked car would have a different circle to any of the others in its range.

Track days.

Would love to do one but not in my car ;) the main reason being is that they are a little hard on components like brake discs (500 quid a set) brake pads (170 quid a set) tyres (580 quid a set) track day insurance (3-400 quid for the day and only up to 5k cover) plus a service after the track day (100 quid) its not cheap for me (at for the maximum of1700 quid and a minimum of 900 quid) so id rather go buy a nice little 205 1.6 GTi and have a blast round in one of those instead :D (and the fact that i like pugs cos of the lift off oversteer and the fact that you can control them well on the throttle).

Post some info on your nova too as it sounds great :D


Nope I think that the asumption is that the 1.2 crank isnt as strong as the 172, not that itll be under anymore stress. Is this true Jo?


Stop, start again without the assumption that Im some spotty little boy racer.

The Clio sport range as stated in the Brochure has a Close ratio steering rack i.e. one turn of the steering wheel gives a greater output at the business end. Nowhere did I use the term quick rack. They were your words. I know what Im talking about here. I fitted a rack to the Nova, and the difference was about two turns of the steering wheel from lock to lock. I paid £50 second hand for mine, and I think they retail near £250 new from TAS (Not power steering though). This has no effect on turning circle (where did you bring that up from), just the amount of arm work.

Im not gonna post the full spec of the Nova coz I get bored of doing it everytime someone questions it, but the basics are a 1.4 16v with head work, cams, the block and head skimmed and intruder pistons running on TBs with DTA management. It has a quaife box, coilovers, wilwoods etc etc. The Tuning company responsible for the engine design are Velos who created the fastest Nova I know of running the same engine, timed at 4.5 to 60mph in competition.

because its little :p

as for the track day, your costs will be no more than 200 quid....for the day.tyres will last, pads will last, discs will last, no need ofr insurance etc etc.

where do you get your pricing from!!!


Insurance is a must on a track day (especially if your car costs lots of money) as ive known one person who did this without insurance and ended up paying for 9ks worth of damage (so he was not a very happy bunny).

You can wear a set of tyres out on a track day too (i know of a few people who have done that too so at 500 quid for a full set its rather expensive).

Brakes can be totally knackered too (just ask anyone who applies their handbrake after having a blast round a track and not letting them cool down) and different pads can wear at different stages.

So minimally it would cost 3-400 quid for insurance (unless your made of money and in writing your car off just go out and buy a new one as your not covered on a normal policy, unless specified) and probably a set of tyres, thus 900 quid (and a service for the car afterwards!) my pricing comes from the fact that i have AP discs, Bridgestone tyres and expensive pads FYI ;)


i never once stated that you were some spotty boy racer, what i did say is that all the clios (except with the possibility of the V6) have the same rack, but as i was stating is that you seemed to think that the sports versions were different to that of the standard 1.2, well the springs probably are but thats about it, the brakes etc will all be the same (its a marketing thing).

I also stated that accessories like ABS, EBC systems are gadgets that make people think that their cars are quicker than they actually are (along with sports suspension which can lead you into thinking that the car can go round corners MUCH quicker than the standard item) so remove all the items like ABS etc and you will have a car that the owner will actually think about what they are doing rather than hoping the car will be doing it for them.

Also i wasnt questioning what you had done to your car to get it up to that spec, i was enquiring because i too like to see what people do, but if i find that something isnt worth throwing their money down the drain for then i will say that it isnt worth it, and what Jonesy wants to do isnt worth it due to the fact he may as well go for a higher model and save more money along with getting roughly the same BHP (and the fact that NO2 on a turbod car isnt really effective as just upgrading to bigger turbos within reason will be more efficient and cheaper in the longrun).

As for what car i drive, its an MY00 Impreza turbo, owned from new, paid off in just over 2 years, its had the following done to it (just minor mods but i think a change of ecu and turbo are due soon).

PPP which includes the removal of the center cat, exhaust from the downpipe back with the center cat replaced with a resonator box off the STi, a Prodrive Backbox, uprated intercooler piping and a Prodrive ecu, she was pushing approx 249bhp when rolling roaded (from the 215bhp standard) and 238lbs of torque. I also have PD7 alloys fitted (another Prodrive accessory along with one of the last sets of Bridgestone SO2 PPs) in anthracite along with Brembo 4 pots and AP discs, and ive also replaced the catted downpipe with a sports downpipe (de cat) so i should be pushing around 260-265bhp on a nice day ;) (and im starting to scare the Evo people round here :D ). When im back into a new job ill see what else i can do (ive got some Eibach springs ive got to fit yet along with some defi gauges) so if your wondering why i never bought an STi or a WRX with 276bhp standard and only a lowly UK car, its because i like the security of UK dealerships and the fact that my car can be looked after and if i have any problems i can go straight to IM and give them sh1t :D (and the fact that there are now UK cars out there pushing over 350bhp safely)


Ok, ya need to get into the reno psychy lol.

reno reuse as many parts as possible, and as many designs. the crank on a 1.2 will be as capable of handling percentage power increases as the 172 crank.

Rods that reno use are superb H section.. they aint gonna alter the sintered steel grade for 1.2 or 2ltr.. not worth it.

The block and 5 main bearing structure is a pretty good design and fairly common to the range (in design aspects)

a 1.2 bottom end is less lightly loaded as std than a 172 ..

the piston assembly follows the same design as the 172, same ally grade etc.

I see no reason AT ALL why the same percentage increase in power could not be achieved. On my 172 turbo unit, I am expecting a 60% increase in power, again, I am confident that the 1.2 could, not only cope, but still be understressed in relation to my crank.. ie be able to take MORE of a percentage increase.

However, would I turbo one ??

Nope.. but, a nice 1.6 screamer would be kewl :D


TB1- i have been on several track days for a laugh......i dont get to race here as my team is based in S.E. Asia.

no need ot explain the basics of track days to me.

i have completed a whole day on a set of RE-720s and not wornthe frons through, those people who you see screaching all the way through the corner ar loading teh car the wrong can go just as fast and not overheat the tyres but being smoother.

i leave my car in gear when parked, and i do have aslightly uprated braking system consisting of harder pads and softer discs......wont leave full spec of my car as i doubt anybody is interested. its MK1 xr2 BTW, and faster than a semi well driven 964 around coombe. only got 110bhp in it!

my pricing comes from the fact that i have AP discs, Bridgestone tyres and expensive pads FYI ;)

Why do u have them fitted if ya aint gonna make any use of them lol ???..

and Tony, sorry m8.. but me thinks prodrive ripped ya off.. they changed damn near the whole exhaust, the ECU, and the piping to the intercooler to gain 14.5% from a HIGHLY tunable TURBO unit ??????

you coulda done it yerself for the price of a rising rate reg, a brass tee piece with tap in it and an hour on the rollers... LOL.. :oops:


LOL...........olcapts really nice and n blunt aint he.......

straight and narrow, straight and narroow..............;)


  182 Arctic Blue

I get the impression when driving the 1.2 that The engine seems capable of more - I wonder if Renault have limited the power in some way I seem to recall something saying that they limited it so that it falls into the group 3 insurance band as something like an 80bhp punto 1.2 16v is group 6? might be talking junk! maybe it was the diesel. Personally im not a fan of modded cars but that doesnt mean im not interested :) but I think the turbocharging option is an expensive but interesting proposition and it would certainly be unique.

What are the logistics of engine swaps from other cars such as the new megane - the 1.6 VVT looks interesting as does the 1.9 dci (270nm torque!) or does the footprint of the cars make this nigh on impossible? I would have thought to save costs the engines would be fairly similar.


Those Bridgestones are excellent tyres, much better than the So3 PPs and probably one of the best wet weather tyres you can get for a road car (and the fact i live in the NW where it seems to rain quite a bit ;)) My discs and pads are getting to the stage where they need changing now so im thinking of going to 330mm rather than the 305mm that are on there now, the pads ill get will be Pagid ones (not cheap at 170 quid) but i do get my monies worth out of me brakes (and hopefully they will be good enough for NM7 ;)).

As for the PPP, well its the only "safe" performance upgrade for the impreza turbo (and the only one that doesnt invalidate your warranty) plus a few hours looking round Prodrive in Warwick (not Banbury) was a treat ;) (and unlike other modifications the PPP actually ADDs value to the car!)



should say that its the graph you need to see when the car is on the rollers, its considerably better than the standard car and the fact that the ECU is completely remapped giving overall better fuelling and fuel consumption along with better power delivery from low down in the rev range to towards the red line and not dying before 6k like most uk cars do (and did i mention it was safe? ;) and no reported cases of any car fitted dying, unlike some other scoobs....)


pagid are great

they ran them in teh cliocup series in the UK 3 yrs ago, no fade no probs at all, but they were expensive. then they switched ot ferodo which were a complete disaster, they are now using Perfoamce Friction which seem to do teh job....
  Clio 197

Damn, I tried to find Pagids and ended up with Ferodo DS 2000s. Just put them in today along with a set of front rotors. Well at least they will be better than the OEM brakes which were Ferodos as well...

  Audi S3 225

Thx for all ur replies and opinions :)

I guess turbo charging isn’t the way to go then! I wasn’t really that serious in it, more curious really. Anyway, the engine conversion 1.6 sounds nice, I just thought that there would be more work changing the engine parts than just fitting a turbo.

How much do engines seem to go for nowadays? I wouldn’t mind a 1.6 or even a 1.4, anything faster than my 1.2! Then maybe I could get a super chip I heard they are better on larger engine cars.;)

There is a nice MY00 turbo engine for sale on scoobynet at the nice price of 895 quid ;) i just dont think it would quite fit into a clio thou :(


Anything is possible!

I appologise if I sounded argumentative yesterday, was very busy and today our company is handing out redundancy notices!

Back to the important stuff. Jonesy, the sumary is correct, it will be easier to transplant an engine. I dont know much about the Renault range, but in Novas, not only are most engine and gearbox parts interchangeable, but the range from 1.0l all of the way up to the new 1.8 16v corsa engine drops in on the same engine mounts using the same driveshafts etc etc. Im guessing its similar in the Clio. For a decent Turbo conversion youll have to do internal work on the bottom end, which is OK if your an experienced mechanic, but will cost a fortune if you have to pay someone else to do it.

Joe, do you know if there is any weight difference between the different engines?

My guess was that the amount of extra power that can be thrown at the 1.2 would be proportional to the the 172, but I hadnt contemplated that it might be able to take more. But looking at it logically it makes sense. If the design is the same in theory it should be capable of handling a similar amount of power. Cheers.



Dont bother doing anything like a turbo or NOS mod to your car. Use the money to help buy a bigger engined car, and then if you want more power, then mod that.
For the monet it would cost you together with the cost of your 1.2, you could get a 172, or something equivilent.


But if it only cost you £100 for a taylor made N2O kit giving 50bhp or more, it could keep you happy until you come to change your car. It is possible.


Hope you dodged the redundancies :D unfortunately with the company i was working with i didnt :( but i think that was down to the fact that they couldnt afford me as 2 trainees were as much as me ;)


Thankyou for your concern. Yes I was lucky enough to keep my job, and our department faired quite well, but alas a good friend has been let go.



Im still not sure. The one you mailed me about is very good, although it will add about another 50% to the cost of the kit Im building. We have some very fine bore copper tubing that we could do similar with. Split the charge two ways and angle them back at each other whilst injecting the fuel through the middle. It wont be as cosmeticly pleasing, but its gonna be hidden away in the depths of the inlet plenum anyway. The design of that fogger has definately given us the inspiration we needed.

Ill keep you posted with what we decide to go with.

Cheers again.

why not do that for each port branch of the inlet manifold then?

you could angle the fuel away from the cylinder, and the gas towards, so you would get almost perfect mixing, the gas velocity will be much higher than teh fuel.

if not, make a fan type nozzle which will spray it in a 120deg radius in teh inlet plenham.

I thought about injecting to each port, but Id have to drill holes and run too much piping. I not only want it to be stealth, but need it to leave no trace when removed for servicing etc. That would have been the best option though.

The guy Im building this with (also the owner of the Nova I drive) is actually a farmer. He mentioned that in his crop spraying equiptment he has some very small nozzles that spray in a fan, or even 360 degree. A fan could be a good idea, although the shape of my inlet plenum could mean stalling of airflow in places and fluid dropping out of suspension. The adaptor plate for the piperx filter is goona be our entrance point and we are gonna run copper piping deep into the inlet plenum and shoot the mix directly at the TB or straight after it. The plenum really is a strange design.

Keep coming up with ideas. They all help.



i say before the TB, about 6-7" before...........and not aimed directly at it.........but ratehr at a spiral around the tubing before the TB.....

I agree to do it b4. The problem is though, that there is no tubing/ducting to the TB. It sits on a horizontal panel in a large box that has an opening of about 6x3" that the piperx adapter plate bolts to.


could you not design you own inlet system? ie, take off the box, and use a remote filter and linked with some samco hose you could put the injector in?

got a pic of the engine bay?