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.
2005 Impreza WRX STI
worth less than 172 IMO
Remapped derv Golf
Well have to wait and see in a few years.
MarkCup
ClioSport Club Member
...dont get me started...
MarkCup
ClioSport Club Member
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
Nippy white cup
lol yeah I just cant stop crying. Damn that nice colour and nice wheels lol
Chris
172cup
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.
MKIII 138
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 ???
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
ClioSport Club Member
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.
Nippy white cup
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
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
ClioSport Club Member
Yep...on the road theres f**k all in it.
172cup
eitherway... we all still drive a girls car. albeit a cup or a fat one
172cup
have to say though... the 172cup is the least looking girly one (with the exception of the v6 of course)
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]
Remapped derv Golf
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.
