Is a Cup worth more or less than a 172

[len_beach]

Im just wondering as I dont want a Cup but would like to be able to compare prices with 172s. Does the exclusivity outweigh the fact the car is poverty spec in comparison?

 

[Bryan]

about the same, exclusivity? i see more cups than i do full-fats round here

 

[greg_m]

people paid less for cups when they were new so in theory they should be worth less.

in practice its about the same, some times more, sometimes less



parkers prices - Cup 53 plate 10k on clock - 11150

- full fat same plate same miles 12020


[Edited by greg_m on 25 August 2005 at 8:40pm]

 

[Clarkie172]

worth less than 172 IMO

 

[Mondial172]

Well have to wait and see in a few years.

 

[Lagerlout]

Less atm, but that will change in a few years time imho.. As big a deal as the Cup may be to people on here, to joe-public its just a cheap version...

 

[MarkCup]

Quote: Originally posted by len_beach on 25 August 2005

...the fact the car is poverty spec...

...dont get me started...

 

[fUbAr]

i think its less, because most buyers dont see the appeal of a model without all the toys, especially ABS.

 

[Ali]

cup owners cry every morning wishing they had a 172.

 

[MarkCup]

Yeah right ^^^ LOL - in fact, Im gonna carry two extra fat people around with me from now on, just to try to recreate the full-fat 172 experience

 

[Chris n nic]

lol yeah I just cant stop crying. Damn that nice colour and nice wheels lol

Chris

 

[daviebroon]

good point... I had 2 people in my cup last night, and it is actually quite slow in comparison... so if thats what its like driving a full fat 172 all the time.... then id favour a cup ANYDAY.

 

[rory182]

well if the 2 passengers weigh 40kg...

its the same as having one passenger about 12.5 / 13 stone


[Edited by rory182 on 26 August 2005 at 10:43am]

 

[Phill1978]

an average adult males weighs 70kgs (12 stone)

the 172 MKII is 1110kgs the cup is 1040kgs so do the math and the weight difference is equivelent to one male freind in the passenger seat.

the car specs on cliosport main page of a weighbridge test on a 172 was 1120kg with a full tank of fuel and no driver add (at least) 70kgs for the drive and the 172 weighs 1180 if your heavier but have half a tank of fuel this should balance out so your/my 172 will always have a rolling weight of at least 1180kgs. still not bad but if you have a passenger that would take the weight to 1250kg ! i personally think it will be more.

a 1230kg 172 with passenger and half a tank of fuel will get trounced by a CUP with just a driver and half a tank of fuel as it will weigh at least 160kg-190 kgs difference 70kg for the passenger and 79kgs difference in start weight.

however a cup with a passenger will still be 10kgs lighter than a full fat 172 with just a driver.

given that unsprung weight add an effective 1bph per kg and the alloys are 6kgs lighter all round you can liken the CUP to a 1040kg car with 174bhp (176ps) and tighter suspension to put the power down.

i own a 172MKII its a fast one for sure as ive passed a 182 (inferno dunno if it was run in but he told me he was absolutley gunning it as we stopped to chat afterwards) i have lighter alloys by 7kgs allround and firmer suspension it made a difference to pass the 182 (albeit very slowly)....

ok now given that and my bros VRS fabia (190hp 320lbft) is faster than my 172 and fairly easily passes 182s past 90mph i ve seen it happen three times and spoke to two of the drivers also they were giving it there all.. given that he has a fekin rapid diesel.. he knows when to change and has sat behind a wrx in it upto 130

a stock CUP pulled 4 car lenghs on it to 110 !! he was impressed to say the least as not many things can beat a car with 320lbft 420nm of torque.. but the CUP did.. and that before you take out the back seats and remove the spare.

the light the car get the more each BHP counts i.e a motorbike with 80hp is equivelent to a car with around 400bhp. that 80kg difference better suspension makes a difference and so does the added bonus of lighter wheels for the unsprung weight.

just my 2 pence..



btw how the hell do you lot live without climate control ???

 

[Lagerlout]

Sorry fella, you raise some interesting points, but your talking b****cks. yes there is a difference. On paper the Cup is faster. In the real world, these cars are so varied in power straight from the factory that it just depends on whether or not you get a good one. My 172 used to slowly creep past my mates Cup ( which went to the big scrap yard in the sky as most of them do lol) at about 90 mph... Him on his own, so the weight adavtage still there and both totally standard.

You right in theory, but in the real world its not quite so simple!!

 

[MarkCup]

Ask Nik or Ian (Blink172) about side by side drags...full fat 172 versus 172 Cup.

Time after time, up the airfield strip, I cleanly and comfortably pulled away from them - not talking 10 lengths up the 1/4 - but comfortably all the same.

Nik swore that next time...hed have his car stripped out...so comprehensive was my weight advantage.

 

[Chris n nic]

Stef is spot on. The difference is very small but depends on if youve got a good un. Mine was a very good one (when it was running right) and even with f**ked cams it was still quicker than a lot of 172s. At the end of the day they are both superb motors and it is purely down to preference. if you feel the need for aircon etc then go for the 172, if not get the Cup

Chris

 

[Pete]

Oh the good old days. I guess 5 pages.

 

[Turkish]

In my experince theres f**k all difference between a cup and a "full-fat" on the road. Had tussles with 3 different cups the owners of which i knew so knew they were going for it (rather than having met a stranger on the road and claiming i beat them when there wouldnt be a conclusive way of saying they were actually gunning it) and each time you couldnt split the two cars.

 

[MarkCup]

Yep...on the road theres f**k all in it.

 

[Phill1978]

nah i disagree but each to their own, theres better suspension, lighter wheels and a heafty weight advantage.. sure you could get a good 172 (like me) but if you have a good CUP with all those advantages it would be faster IMO.

 

[mr sheep]

defo worth less and go for less

 

[daviebroon]

eitherway... we all still drive a girls car. albeit a cup or a fat one

 

[Phill1978]

Quote: Originally posted by d.brown on 26 August 2005

eitherway... we all still drive a girls car. albeit a cup or a fat one its just that the cup looks better

thats the beauty of it people think its a sporty version of shopping trolley and then get passed by in their v6/v8 luxo barges in 182 hp of lightness

 

[daviebroon]

have to say though... the 172cup is the least looking girly one (with the exception of the v6 of course)

 

[Neil82]

Quote: Originally posted by meggerman on 26 August 2005


an average adult males weighs 70kgs (12 stone)

the 172 MKII is 1110kgs the cup is 1040kgs so do the math and the weight difference is equivelent to one male freind in the passenger seat.

the car specs on cliosport main page of a weighbridge test on a 172 was 1120kg with a full tank of fuel and no driver add (at least) 70kgs for the drive and the 172 weighs 1180 if your heavier but have half a tank of fuel this should balance out so your/my 172 will always have a rolling weight of at least 1180kgs. still not bad but if you have a passenger that would take the weight to 1250kg ! i personally think it will be more.

a 1230kg 172 with passenger and half a tank of fuel will get trounced by a CUP with just a driver and half a tank of fuel as it will weigh at least 160kg-190 kgs difference 70kg for the passenger and 79kgs difference in start weight.

however a cup with a passenger will still be 10kgs lighter than a full fat 172 with just a driver.

given that unsprung weight add an effective 1bph per kg and the alloys are 6kgs lighter all round you can liken the CUP to a 1040kg car with 174bhp (176ps) and tighter suspension to put the power down.

i own a 172MKII its a fast one for sure as ive passed a 182 (inferno dunno if it was run in but he told me he was absolutley gunning it as we stopped to chat afterwards) i have lighter alloys by 7kgs allround and firmer suspension it made a difference to pass the 182 (albeit very slowly)....

ok now given that and my bros VRS fabia (190hp 320lbft) is faster than my 172 and fairly easily passes 182s past 90mph i ve seen it happen three times and spoke to two of the drivers also they were giving it there all.. given that he has a fekin rapid diesel.. he knows when to change and has sat behind a wrx in it upto 130

a stock CUP pulled 4 car lenghs on it to 110 !! he was impressed to say the least as not many things can beat a car with 320lbft 420nm of torque.. but the CUP did.. and that before you take out the back seats and remove the spare.

the light the car get the more each BHP counts i.e a motorbike with 80hp is equivelent to a car with around 400bhp. that 80kg difference better suspension makes a difference and so does the added bonus of lighter wheels for the unsprung weight.

just my 2 pence..



btw how the hell do you lot live without climate control ???





Cup weighs 1021 kg.

BTW how the hell do you live with a 18 secs 0-100 car?

 

[ukaskew]

Quote: Originally posted by greg_m on 25 August 2005


people paid less for cups when they were new so in theory they should be worth less.

in practice its about the same, some times more, sometimes less



parkers prices - Cup 53 plate 10k on clock - 11150

- full fat same plate same miles 12020



[Edited by greg_m on 25 August 2005 at 8:40pm]



Parkers dont appear to actually check with real life transactions of any kind then. I paid £8395 for a 53 plate Cup with 8k on the clock and a private CUP plate a few months ago, and that was stickered price from a dealer.

Admittedly Ive seen more expensive ones but not massively so. If, however, someone does want my 53 plate Cup for £11150 send me a PM straight away!

 

[Lagerlout]

Quote: Originally posted by Chris nnic on 26 August 2005


Stef is spot on. The difference is very small but depends on if youve got a good un. Mine was a very good one (when it was running right) and even with f**ked cams it was still quicker than a lot of 172s. At the end of the day they are both superb motors and it is purely down to preference. if you feel the need for aircon etc then go for the 172, if not get the Cup

Chris

Well said that man. It does appear though that the good Cups are quite a bit quicker than the good 172s.... Most standard good Cups get what, 14.5s on th 1/4 from whst Ive seen on here.... whereas the good 172s get 14.7/8, so theres definitely a difference.

As Mark correctly states though, on the road it equates to very little. Im sure round a track the weight/suspension makes a big difference.

Either way, they all get the 4k rattle!!


[Edited by lagerlout1 on 26 August 2005 at 8:39pm]

 

[Phill1978]

the 182cup is the best of both worlds

 

[Mondial172]

Agreed! The difference is tiny! I have a cup and have driven a full fat mk2 172. The Cup handles better for sure but the extra performance isnt noticable on the normal road. The lighter weight just seemed to make the car more responsive but it just might be mine.