mk1 172 or mk2 172?

[shaun172mk1]

I have recently bought a mk1 172 and have found an article in the evo magazine, which states that the mk1 does 60 in 6.6 sec and 100 in 18.3 sec. which is conciderably faster than the newer 172 and pretty much matches the civic type r, and the mk1 looks better than the newer one. why did renault do this?

 

[GarethM]

i wouldnt read too much into 0-60 figures on the RS's there re so many differing times but at the end of the day the mk2 172 is just a quick as the mk1 172.

 

[shaun172mk1]

i wouldnt read too much into 0-60 figures on the RS's there re so many differing times but at the end of the day the mk2 172 is just a quick as the mk1 172.

yeah i see wot your saying, just havent had a chance to prove otherwise

 

[darswold]

i think its all down to weight, the mk1 was made out of crisp packets, ive had mine for a few years and its still poo of a stick !
but its true what garf says, both are equally the same.....its also down to the driver

 

[John D]

I have recently bought a mk1 172 and have found an article in the evo magazine, which states that the mk1 does 60 in 6.6 sec and 100 in 18.3 sec. which is conciderably faster than the newer 172 and pretty much matches the civic type r, and the mk1 looks better than the newer one. why did renault do this?

Its hardly considerably quicker! From what I've heard the mk1 is arguably better to drive because its lighter and had cable throttle (rather than drive by wire). It also has longer gear ratios than the mk2 (mk2 was shortened to offset the extra weight I believe)

 

[Middo]

I heard the mk 1 was a better car because they used more expensive materials making it, as it was meant to be a limited run, so when they made the mk2 they had to reduce the quality of materials to make up costs? for example the engine is meant to be made out of better metal than the ph2 etc etc. Cant remember who told me this though

 

[Lam7r]

I have owned both and can say i prefer the ph1 172. The gearing is a lot better now i am used to it and it does feel faster than my 172 FF although i had a bad 172 FF.

Been up against a few 182s and i can pull on them. Nothing to blow you mind but the qu-quick is faster slightly

Saying that renault engines are up and down at best of times regarding power.

 

[Danith]

ive never driven a ph2 but i got to say ph1 looks better IMO and stands out more from std clios (unless ur seein the back of a mk2).
mk2 has better rear end but u can put that on a ph1 easily.
apparently the ph1 is quicker but i cant see it bein noticable - only on paper.
depends which u think looks better

 

[hoggaz]

Mk2 front end looks meaner

 

[sneeks]

Personally I prefer the mk2 which is why I bought one. I'd imagine they are pretty much the same performance wise.

 

[Middo]

^ now i'd disagree with that, i'd say the best part of ph1 is the front end, and the best part of the ph2 is the rear, imo the ph1 looks more agressive from the front, the lights also look better

 

[klmillard]

phase 1 looks way more aggressive front end IMO.

phase 2 looks "smarter" in but dont have the sporty car look imo

 

[Day]

Phase 1 front with tinted heatlights phase 2 rear end with ph2 bumper...

Well 2 out of 3 aint bad

 

[Middo]

thats why your cars so damned sexy

 

[Day]

Shish Kebab

 

[Ads_172]

I'd assume power to weight makes the ph1 slightly quicker, but negliable enough that driver ability makes the difference. The Cup then ups the ante yet again.

I prefer the looks of rawness of the ph1, hence why I bought one. I'm still torn as to whether I should put the rear back to standard or keep the 182 theme going for originality: the first ph1 to have a 182 rear AFAIK...?

 

[Lagerlout]

Mmmmmm Xenons .... But it's personal taste.

I think the ph1's are kind of dumb looking and not remotely 'aggresive'. Although in all fairnes, I just wanted a new car and couldn't bear the dash in the ph1's.lol.

 

[John185k]

I have had both. The wider track in the phase 2 makes handling more composed.

 

[Steve2004]

I have had both. The wider track in the phase 2 makes handling more composed.

Didn't think the ph2 had a wider track? (except the cup)

 

[John185k]

im sure its wider by 14 mm

 

[Andi-B]

I've owned a mk1 172 and I must admit the beast felt quicker to 60 than my 182
If I could have my old 172 with the 182 suspension setup for quicker twists and turns that'd be my ideal car

 

[Ads_172]

My car feels nice today!

Surely half a cm each side (7mm) wouldn't drastically affect handling? That could be counteracted with slightly larger profile tyres...

 

[djmode]

imo deffinatly the ph 2 its just a much smarter car and i have raced a gew ph 1 172's and there isnt anything in it. th only difference is how you can personally drive a car!

 

[edde]

My car feels nice today!

Surely half a cm each side (7mm) wouldn't drastically affect handling? That could be counteracted with slightly larger profile tyres...

Small difference can make huge changes.

im sure its wider by 14 mm

Wheel offset is different but the car itself driveshafts etc are much the same.

I have had both. The wider track in the phase 2 makes handling more composed.

The different shocks and suspension setup camber etc also have an effect.

apparently the ph1 is quicker but i cant see it bein noticable - only on paper.
depends which u think looks better

In theory there quicker they have much of the advanatges of being lighweight and having the often better engine using the old head casting rarther then the newer 172's which use the later turbo head casting along mnay phse 2's use the early casting then again you get good engine ie Chris and Nics' Cup engine which although based on the new casting is very very quick.

 

[W17GLE]

mk1 is best but only coz i have one probably no different. oh yeah mk1 looks better:rasp:

 

[jongsr4]

Ive gone from a 172 cup to a mk1 172 and IMO the cup is ever so slightly more responsive, and handles slightly better too, although the difference really is tiny, Overall I have to say I prefer the cup...but like I say the difference is so small its not really worth worrying about

Have to say though my cup had only done 20k whereas my mk1 has done 70 odd

 

[E-ray_172]

the 172 cup and 182 is quicker by a tip of a nail when both drivers are the same. around corners to.driven both and i feel the mk1 172 just feels more raw imo,makes u feel so much more aware of your speed. also its more rare which i most like.