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!

is the clio a sports car ?



  MKIII 138
well is it ?

ok theres generic terms hothatch, supermini etc.. but is the 182/197/172cup a sports car ?

would you call an RS4 a sports car or a Scooby STi ?

there both 4 door saloons with big boots and 4/5 seats.

the clio sports can do from 6.5-7.2 to sixty 140mph 30-70 in impressive times, good on track (better than many suposed "sports" cars, have great handling, the sporty`ish looks and in some cases brembo`s and recaro seats even sash dampers with remote resoviours.

but forgetting that in a conversation or a post on a forum if you posted you drive a sports car and then someone asked what it was would telling them a clio be daft

is the clio a sports car if not why not

discuss !
 

Daniel

ClioSport Moderator
  Whichever has fuel
i'd class a sports car a car that has been built for pleasure rather than a necessity.
mx5, mr2 mgf etc.
 
  MKIII 138
superfastdan said:
i'd class a sports car a car that has been built for pleasure rather than a necessity.
mx5, mr2 mgf etc.

i see what your saying but all of those cant hold a candle standard for standard to a 182 trophy for handling
 
  Pink & Blue 182, JDM DC2
I think you have to find the proper definition of sportscar... I've found

An automobile equipped for racing, especially an aerodynamically shaped one-passenger or two-passenger vehicle having a low center of gravity and steering and suspension designed for precise control at high speeds.

I wouldn't say the Clio is the above.
 

Daniel

ClioSport Moderator
  Whichever has fuel
Yeah agree, a porsche cayenne turbo is not a sports car, but its faster than my clio, but the mx5s etc were built for fun, not as a daily driver with a fast engine, like a 182.
 
  172 Cup (2003)
meggerman said:
i see what your saying but all of those cant hold a candle standard for standard to a 182 trophy for handling

I don't know how the 172 cup compares to a Trophy for handling, but my MR2 handled a lot better than my Cup.

... if that makes sense.:S
 
it's not a sportscar, i've decided, it's a sporty hatch, but not a sportscar

the cliosports are adapted from the shopping trolley 1.2's etc, whereas sports cars are built soley to be that, if your with me:S i know what i mean in my head!
 

ian Bojo 182

ClioSport Club Member
  FN2 Type R +MK6 Golf
Most sports cars try to be fast,mid engined and have 2 seats.

The clio is none of the above

ian
 
  S-Max
If Renault call it a "Renault Sport" that's good enough for me ;)

Seriously though, it's like saying are Lincoln a football team.... Yes they are but so are Man Utd but you couldn't say they play the same type of football.

So, yes our RS's are sports cars but perhaps more like the Lincoln of sports cars perhaps?
 
Jays172 said:
it's not a sportscar, i've decided, it's a sporty hatch, but not a sportscar

the cliosports are adapted from the shopping trolley 1.2's etc, whereas sports cars are built soley to be that, if your with me:S i know what i mean in my head!

I agree with the above and would also say a v6 clio is a sporty hatch as it was never originally designed to have a mid mounted engine or rear wheel drive. It's like that review they did on topgear once about buying convertibles. Most of the cars that they would actually buy which was a convertible was a car which was designed to be one in the first place. Not a car that was a coupe/saloon and then turned into a convertible. If you get my drift...
 
superfastdan said:
i'd class a sports car a car that has been built for pleasure rather than a necessity.
mx5, mr2 mgf etc.

^^What I was gonna say. Almost always a two seater = sacrificing practicality for fun.

Interesting question though Meggerman. RS clios definately have a real sporting slant to them, but I think hot hatch describes them better than sports car as they maintain some practicality with the performance.
 
I'd say a v6 was a sports car, even a mini exotic, cos its mid-engined and has no back seats

And a Cayenne is defo not a sports car! just a very capable truck
 
Chris K said:
I agree with the above and would also say a v6 clio is a sporty hatch as it was never originally designed to have a mid mounted engine or rear wheel drive. It's like that review they did on topgear once about buying convertibles. Most of the cars that they would actually buy which was a convertible was a car which was designed to be one in the first place. Not a car that was a coupe/saloon and then turned into a convertible. If you get my drift...

at least someone gets my drift, that's exactly what i was trying to put into words!
 
ian 182 said:
Most sports cars try to be fast,mid engined and have 2 seats.

The clio is none of the above

ian

So in that respect then, the V6 clio must be a sports car as it fits all 3 of those requirements..

Still a clio though ;)
 
  172 Cup (2003)
Baldylocks said:
Interesting question though Meggerman. RS clios definately have a real sporting slant to them, but I think hot hatch describes them better than sports car as they maintain some practicality with the performance.

Aint that the truth.

Tried to get my 32" LCD home from the store in my MR2. Not good. Half of it was stuck out of the boot. Had to tie it shut :(

'least in the 172 i'd have a better chance!
 
  Inferno 182 w/ Recaros ;)
I'm pretty darn sure a sports car has been defined to be roofless.


Even so a clio would never, ever be a sports car.
 
Baldylocks said:
I'd say a v6 was a sports car, even a mini exotic, cos its mid-engined and has no back seats

And a Cayenne is defo not a sports car! just a very capable truck

Yes but it was never really designed that way which was my point with the convertibles.

Plus the v6 is not really streets ahead of 172/182 performance.
 
  Clio 197
182/172's are very HOT hatches...

..."sports car" doesn't necesarily mean that it's quick, or handles brilliantly (compared to the 182/172).

I think this is where the confusion might lie.
 
  Pink & Blue 182, JDM DC2
As I said back on page 1 Oms, the problem lies in the definition of "sports car". Once you have the definition you can make your own mind up.
 
  Yaris Hybrid
I always thought that the "traditional" sports car was a front engine rear wheel drive two seater. Not sure as to whether it had to be open or not.

In that sense the MX-5 is the definitive sports car.

But there are Sports cars in the traditional sense with a capital "S" and then sports cars with a lower case "s" as a generic description.

An F430 or 911 is a sports car, the MX-5 is a Sports car.

The 182 is a "sporty" car.

Or for a second opinion look in the back of Evo magazine where they have all the performance figures and see what they have in the sports car bracket. They are all two seaters but with no preference as to engine position. Note how some cars are not in that catagory but instead are put into the convertible class, supercar class or coupes/gt's class.
 
  Tangoed Works
LOL^^

I believe the traditional British sports car was generally front engined, 2 seater and roof less. Power didnt really make too much difference, aka, Triumph Spitfire, TR6, Austin Healey etc
 
  Corsa C 1.2
a golf gti, 172/182, astra vxr are all hot hatches

a clio v6, R32 (in terms of power), 5 Turbo are all super hot hatches

Murcielago, enzo, zonda are all super cars

RS4, M3, evo and scooby are all sports cars


you may agree, you may disagree, but that is my opinion, and that opinion is coming from a 13 year old who knows his stuff:rasp:
 
Chris K said:
Yes but it was never really designed that way which was my point with the convertibles.

Plus the v6 is not really streets ahead of 172/182 performance.

I'm not really refering to out-right performance, just the type of car. A 172/182 is easier to live with day to day but perhaps not as much fun or pleasure to own as a V6.

The V6 is a difficult car to pigeon hole in any way; it does'nt really have any equivalent made by another manufacturer. Take your point that the clio was never originally designed to have the engine in the back!
 
Chris K said:
Yes but it was never really designed that way which was my point with the convertibles.

Plus the v6 is not really streets ahead of 172/182 performance.

I'm not really refering to out-right performance, just the type of car. A 172/182 is easier to live with day to day but perhaps not as much fun or pleasure to own as a V6.

The V6 is a difficult car to pigeon hole in any way; it does'nt really have any equivalent made by another manufacturer. Take your point that the clio was never originally designed to have the engine in the back!
 
lol its a shopping trolley for grannies and pretty girls, some came with big engines.

Sports car its not.

The V6 is an embarrassing mistake trying to better the 5 turbo a task it cannot do. The turbo was good then the turbo 2 was better. The v6 can be humped by a 'normal' clio (lol) sport.

Hot hatch is the best term

sports cars are ferraris (the tame ones), S2000's, etc.

M3's, scoobs etc are in the hot hatch fast exec saloon category.

Super cars are Zondas, merc slr's, nova 1.2's (no really), veyrons etc
 


Top