Mk1 or Mk2 172

[fUbAr]

Please could any 172 owners tell me which version they prefer and why. also any common problems etc. Im thinking of getting one but not sure which version to get. This EXCLUDES cup drivers (sorry) because i like my luxuries far too much.

Ta

 

[Tom]

Mate have a search.

 

[Dave]

Get the Mark 2. The Mark 1 i like very much but the Mark 2 IS better.

 

[norfolkminis]

Ive owned both. Now got a Mk2. IMHO I think the Mk2 is better. Traction control, better road holding.

Main problems Ive had :

Headlight washer balls going AWOL x2

Headlamp washer bottle cracked.

Alarm Changed

All the above done under warrenty.

 

[Rich-D]

The mk1 is slightly quicker than the mk2, but the mk2 has more low end (off cam) pull than the mk1, handles better, has a closer ratio box, more toys, a nicer interior and looks better (IMO).

 

[Lagerlout]

What Rich said ^^^^^ prefer the clolour logo on the mk1 seats, and the gearknob tho....

 

[telford_mike]

Youre going to get a bit of a meaningless answer on the reliability / faults side of this debate, because the Mk1s are older and will have done more miles and had more faults.

 

[thedoc]

Im biased, go for a mk 2.

the climate control in this weather is ace!

I like the colour stiching on the seats in the mk1 though.

 

[norfolkminis]

Quote: Originally posted by telford_mike on 24 May 2004

Youre going to get a bit of a meaningless answer on the reliability / faults side of this debate, because the Mk1s are older and will have done more miles and had more faults.

Saying that I owned my mk1 for 5 months, and had no probs, apart from 4k rattle just starting.

But Ive had 4 faults with the mk2 in as many months. good ol Renault.

 

[specialK]

2 x Mk1s - no real problems with either of them, and between them they had covered over 100k ! one covered over 60k in less than 2 years and one covered over 50k in just under 3 years.

 

[Gareth]

i have a mk2, and prefer the mk2 from the mk1, the interior on the mk2 is just so much better. (apart from the colour stiching)

 

[m_darby]

mark 2 looks, mrk 1 performance and feel of the car

 

[matt the cat]

Just come from a 2 now in a 1. apart from the styling (excluding front) being better on 2, i think the 1 is the better all rounder. It just seems to feel better to drive, and the interior although dated is better nailed together.

Plus the Mk1 is a rarer sight and it is the original!!!

Just my opinion - each to their own

 

[specialK]

my above comment was objective only - from a looks point of view only you can decide, they are reasonably different, and its a matter of personal preference. I only liked the Mk1s - didnt like the Mk2s at all when they were new - but they have grown on me.

 

[NaplesValver]

as a neutral party here i didnt know the mk1 was faster, thought the mk2 was but hey-ho!!!

on the looks side i like the mk1, think it looks meaner thean the mk2, has more road prescence.

IMHO of course.

-->BV

 

[Ben H]

Im not a 172 owner, but I looked very carefully into buying a Ph1 172 last year as well as into a new Cup (as it was then) and Ph2 172.

As is the case now, the Ph1 172 price gap seemed to be more than enough to compensate for the age and loss of a few extras. I also think they look more distinguished than the Ph2 172 does from the rest of the Clio range (esp. the front bumper). I also liked the fact that the Ph1 172 came with a few really rare colour options (yellow, met red) and that there was also the green leathered-up 172 Exclusive if I fancied some... er... exclusivity!

I may one day re-visit the 172 buying debate myself. My eye is taken by the rare yellow Ph1 172s. Mmmm.

 

[m_darby]

I just dont like the front of my mrk 1. I like my dci mrk 2 better. Before i thought renault had forgotten about the rear of the mrk 1 but people think it is just a normal clio and try to blow you away...... oh and fail lol

 

[fUbAr]

ive got a 1.4 in the Mk1 172 shape at the moment and i must say i do like the styling of it. At the moment there is only a couple of grand between the two types... and im wondering if the price is worth the extra?

 

[viceroy]

I went from a mk1 shape 1.4 16v to a mk1 shape 172 simply because I liked the styling better and the mk1 is more raw, especially on the track, the mk2 has become a little too soft

 

[Woof]

Ive had both.

The Mk1 brakes felt more responsive than my mk2
The MK1 has nicer logos on the seat
The Mk1 has nice white dials
The Mk1 has better stereo controls on the steering wheel
The Mk1 has nicer trim touches, such as the silver trim on the dash and the doors

The Mk2 is much more responsive when accelerating
The Mk2 has a tidier dash board
The Mk2 has colour coded external trim

I prefer the external styling of the Mk2, but the internal styling of the Mk1.