What's new
By:
ClioSport.net

This is a sample guest message. 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.

mk1 vs mk2 0-60mph

S

scoobytyper26



i prefer the look of the mk 2 clio 172 (non cup!) but prefer the faster pace of the mk1 clio 172....is there much differencein the 2?



d rather spend less than get a mk2, but there is a mk 2 with 28k 52 plate in blue for 6500 quid im seeing tonight....or shoyuld i get a mk1??



ARRGHH, im confused!!



Matt
 


Difference between the 172 phase 1/172 phase2/ 172 cup/182/ 182cup is a gnats c**k. I wouldnt consider the reason for buying one over the other performance related, its more looks/spec IMO that will sway the choice.
 


You need to drive both matey - It is not just about the straight line speed with these cars.

I find the handling much better on the mk1 172s and it does feel quicker - Basically just a lighter car with slightly diff cat setup.

I went from a 172 Cup to a mk1 172 and my current mk1 is more fun that the cup was (to me)

You need to drive both really
 


Nope the interior of the Mk2 172 is a massive improvement over the mk1.

Over 50% of parts were changed in between the two including chassis changes.

The mk1 I drove was much softer and had more roll than my mk2. May just have been a bad one though. Also the gearing was improved on th mk2, thus the mk1 has a slightly quicker 0-60, but they both reach the ton at about the same time and terminal.


[Edited by lagerlout1 on 26 July 2005 at 4:33pm]
 


Nope dash is totally different, Phase 1 has coloured renaultsport logo on the seats the phase 2 has grey, phase 1 has silver trim on the doorcards, phase 1 steering wheel is different and IIRC the phase 1 rear headrests are different too. As for performance its well known you get good and bad of both, engines seem to vary in power output from car to car.
 


Mk1 you can cruise at 90 just below 4k - You can also do 70 in 2nd gear.

Would not advise you to buy a 172 with more than 40-45k on the clock though

Also if you get a late mk1 alot of the parts are mk2 parts
 


Make sure you check the gearboxes for rattles in the mk1s some of them have been badly abused - suppose it is the same for mk2s though - And loony is correct you get good and bad engines
 


I actually prefer the mk1 172 interior tbh! I thought the mk2 interior quality was worse. All about personal opinion tho
 


Ive had one mk1 172 and two mk2 172s. Preferred the interior in the mk2 by a LONG shot but am convinced my mk1 was faster than either of my mk2s. Couldnt live with the interior of the mk1 again though hence getting another mk2, and i prefer the climate control to the straight forward air conditioning of the mk1.
 


It is purely preference but cant honestly see how MK2 interior was improved?:sleep:

Los most of its silver bits and the ones in place look cheap. (I.e Carbon silver insert things!) :cry:

Like stated purley preference



However get a MK1 there loads better!
 


Quote: Originally posted by wrx-172 on 26 July 2005
It is purely preference but cant honestly see how MK2 interior was improved?:sleep:Los most of its silver bits and the ones in place look cheap. (I.e Carbon silver insert things!) :cry:Like stated purley preference However get a MK1 there loads better!


Well, for me the plastics are of a better quality (sort of soft to the touch), the climate control unit looks nice, the seats looks better and its got nicer door handles :oops: Gotta say that I always preferred the mk1s white dials. The mk2s look too 1.2.

But its obviously down to personal preferences...in my opinion, the mk1 172 was a bit of a boat in the handling department, but someone on this thread has gone from a Cup to a mk1 172 and thinks its a better drive. At the end of the day, youve got to try (or buy in my case)!) both before you can say for sure which you like best.
 


MK2 for me on interior looks, I may prefer the MK1 exterior with coloured bumpstrips but not without, dont like the MK1 wheels either, all personal taste though. Havent driven a MK1 so cant comment there!
 


driven mk 1 172 , mk 2 172 & 182

IMO the mk 1 seems faster and handles better then both. i prefer the 15" aswell seem to get loads of torque steer from the big horrible 16"

my mk 1 is rolling on to 83k miles now she seems fine im even going to snetterton on friday for a trackday.
 


Must admit I liek the mk2 rear bumper a lot.

For me I went mk1, almost entirely due to price :)

I couldnt warrant spending the extra onthe cup I really wanted at the time when the mk1 in 99% of day to day driving felt the same.

I like the mk2 interior more, but not the 172 cup seats.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

R
New Clio 200 EDC member
Replies
27
Views
15K
James
James
M
Clio Mk1 (williams or valver) handle as well as the mk2 172/182
2
Replies
42
Views
9K
mike1986
M
Brad.shepp
Black & Orange Mk2 project
3 4 5
Replies
163
Views
36K
Brad.shepp
Brad.shepp
quik99
Do i buy a mk1 or mk2 172? Advice Please
Replies
23
Views
2K
172mkI
1
R
Mk2 172 v R27 - Big review after ownership of both :D
Replies
10
Views
3K
Marv-C
Marv-C
Back
Top