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.

my clio 182 is quicker than my previous corsa vxrs



  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
i never said it was totally reliable!! Jeez chip please read, I said it was unreliable and you asked why and I said we'll actually nothing actually went wrong with it but I still didn't class it as reliable because It was just deteriorating , it felt nowhere near as solid as it was when I first bought it, from a drive ability point of view it felt like I was just crossing my fingers and waiting for something to break, I wouldn't put trust in that car to drive me to Manchester and back, therefore imo it was unreliable, and pretty much was right seen as a day after you owning it the turbo went , which I bit my lip when I heard was gutted.
saying that I absolutely loved this car , and you well know that after me messaging you to buy it back lol.

actually of love that chip, would be good to see this car again, but I take it you mean passenger ride lol, anyways after going back to a standard clutch I'd probably only stall the b****cks off it again lol. You need regular usage of those helix clutches to get used to them.

To me mate if nothing goes wrong, but you just feel like it might, its reliable, sounds like a difference of opinion anyway and not relevant to this thread.

Yeah that clutch is a b**ch, lol
 
  Evo 5 RS
As Chip says I had more emphasis on the stage 3 than the actual Vxr as a package. In the same regard as running more than 250bhp through a standard f4r. As a drive in drive out package it's just something I wouldn't entertain on a car that's still fairly new
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
As Chip says I had more emphasis on the stage 3 than the actual Vxr as a package. In the same regard as running more than 250bhp through a standard f4r. As a drive in drive out package it's just something I wouldn't entertain on a car that's still fairly new

Ironically considering the VXR is the one turbo from the factory, Id much sooner trust a standard N/A clio F4R bottom end at that power than a VXR one, lol
(I realise the clio has an unfair 100cc per cylinder advantage!)
 
  182 Turbo
I just remembered i changed the intercooler on that for an st-3 one, it had an st-1 or -2 i cant rememer, anyways the -3 has a bigger core, i drove it up and down the road a few times after i fitted it with no bumper on, felt alot better actually.

All this turbo chat is making me so excited to do my corsa c zlet conversion, can't wait!
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
FI makes so much more sense

Indeed, the only reason any N/A cars exist at all in motorsport is when the FI cars are banned, so if you are looking to be very quick and have no such rule banning you then its ludicous doing anything else really.
 
  182 Turbo
FI makes so much more sense

It does, people spend thousands and thousands of pounds on they're clio's or any n/a car for that matter to get such small gains and not really any substantial gains, if you don't like clio's out the box don't buy them really. All IMO of course.
 

davo172

ClioSport Club Member
  TCR'd 172
Really quick these little things... i love it, everyone on corsa d and vxr online thinks the corsa vxr would be quicker but it isnt(from experience).

Ive owned a corsa vxr for 4 years so i have a good idea of how they perform.

s**t thread but maybe useful to some.


Everytime I have seen a corsa vxr over 1/4 mile at santa pod or avon park go against a 182 ( a fair few times ) it will be pretty much equal all way down strip run same sort of times. If you had a corsa VXR that was 240 plus and your 182 is quicker ( not just the fact you think its quicker because it revs better and probly makes more noise) Then your corsa was no where near 240 !! Unless you have Timed both cars I think you are mistaken !
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
It does, people spend thousands and thousands of pounds on they're clio's or any n/a car for that matter to get such small gains and not really any substantial gains, if you don't like clio's out the box don't buy them really. All IMO of course.

And yet ironically you are planning to buy an N/A corsa C and then turbo it with an engine transplant? sounds kind of the same thing as building a turbo clio 197 with an F4RT etc surely?
 
  Evo 5 RS
Nothing wrong with NA tuning either. Stringing an ITB f4R is a try before you die experience. Doesn't matter if Joeys turbo 182 cup is quicker or not tbh
 
  182 Turbo
And yet ironically you are planning to buy an N/A corsa C and then turbo it with an engine transplant? sounds kind of the same thing as building a turbo clio 197 with an F4RT etc surely?

Are you actually purposely trying to gun me down by anything I say now or I just need to explain things super clearly because you can't understand? I'm doing a forced induction engine conversion as opposed to spending £3000 - £4000 on trying to improve an n/a engine, I.e a 2 grand inlet for 20bhp, or 5 grand on bodies, for 35bhp,

if you spend the 5k doing a transplant or even turbo or supercharge your n/a engine, then the cars not really n/a no more, and you WOULD get substantial gains, so the opposite of me saying thousands for small gains.
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
Nothing wrong with NA tuning either.

Well the gains in bhp per £1K spent is certainly wrong with it if you are used to tuning with turbo engines instead, but its a different experience and I still enjoy both. There isnt only one answer to what type of tuning is best to enjoy driving, but there is one answer as to which will be the most powerful for the same money.
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
Are you actually purposely trying to gun me down by anything I say now or I just need to explain things super clearly because you can't understand? I'm doing a forced induction engine conversion as opposed to spending £3000 - £4000 on trying to improve an n/a engine, I.e a 2 grand inlet for 20bhp, or 5 grand on bodies, for 35bhp,

You must have not made your post clear enough then mate, I assumed that the spending thousands of pounds to make a car that starts as N/A quick that you dissaproved off would be including turboing a clio. If not then yes I agree that if the only thing that matters to you is power/torque then any N/A car that stays N/A is a bad idea value for money wise.
But that said I'd wager a lot of people on this site spending a week at the ring with either my turbo clio or my rs2 clio, would actually have more fun and learn the track better in the RS2 one, turbos sometimes make your lap quicker and less fun at the same time especially if you are just learning to drive on track still.
 
  RB Clio 182
You cant just go on the peak figure unless both cars have a CVT gearbox, you need to look at the power across a couple of thousand rpm at least to allow for you going through a gear and then changing.

I do agree a 242bhp corsa is quicker than a standard clio by the way, just disagreeing with your method.

Either his corsa wasnt still making the 242 he thought it was, or the clio is actually on bodies and he hasnt noticed, or he just isnt very good at deciding what car is quicker (terminal would be a better gauge on the quarter than time TBH as time is too much just about the first 60ft)

Here are a few times to have a look at...

http://www.vxronline.co.uk/forum/sh...4-Mile-Time-Leader-Board&highlight=1/4+Leader

Ok then it might not be quicker but it certainly feels it, maybe due to it been older, noisier, louder and that it revs alot more with all the power being at the top end.

Lol at this thread hahaha.
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
Here are a few times to have a look at...

http://www.vxronline.co.uk/forum/sh...4-Mile-Time-Leader-Board&highlight=1/4+Leader

Ok then it might not be quicker but it certainly feels it, maybe due to it been older, noisier, louder and that it revs alot more with all the power being at the top end.

Lol at this thread hahaha.

As Ive already said, you'd be better looking at terminals as a gauge of speed really, but even going on the times in there high 13s for the best stage 3 cars is a lot better than any standard 182 is ever going to manage I would imagine.
 
  RB Clio 182
The stage 3 astra which would have been 290-300hp got a 15.2 and the stage 3 corsa got 14.9, what about those?
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
The stage 3 astra which would have been 290-300hp got a 15.2 and the stage 3 corsa got 14.9, what about those?

I would say either they werent well driven or werent well setup, someone going slower than a car is capable of doesnt prove anything, you need to look at the best of breed to see what a good one well driven will do for both cars.
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
I know its only topgear but the astra vxr is only .8 of a faster than a 182 which has around 60hp and tons of torque more. The stigs a decent driver too lol.

Look at the corsa burg ;) and that was with ice on the track!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Top_Gear_test_track_Power_Lap_Times

They have the corsa listed as nearly 3 seconds a lap quicker than a clio 182, and thats a standard corsa vxr not a modified one which would be noticeably quicker.

Rubbish metric though, the conditions changing can easily effect lap times a lot.
 
  RB Clio 182
They have the corsa listed as nearly 3 seconds a lap quicker than a clio 182, and thats a standard corsa vxr not a modified one which would be noticeably quicker.

Rubbish metric though, the conditions changing can easily effect lap times a lot.

Thats the burg edition, it is 205ps not 192 like the origional one, it also has bilstein dampers and springs, larger brembo brakes(similar to the 200) and a drexler limited slip diff. Imo this would be quicker than a stage 3 corsa vxr around there with standard brakes and diff, with the only handling mod being 40ml springs which mine in question had.
 
  182/RS2/ Turbo/Mk1
Thats the burg edition, it is 205ps not 192 like the origional one, it also has bilstein dampers and springs, larger brembo brakes(similar to the 200) and a drexler limited slip diff. Imo this would be quicker than a stage 3 corsa vxr around there with standard brakes and diff, with the only handling mod being 40ml springs which mine in question had.

Unless they ever put a stage 3 corsa round you will never know, but like I said its a pretty rubbish metric anyway, the track conditions vary too much, if it was on the same day it would be great as a performance comparison but it isnt.
 

Scott S

ClioSport Club Member
  172 Flamer & ER-6F
I have a 172 and the wife has a Corsa VXR and the Corsa just seems too heavy. It's nice and feels quicker but doesn't seem to have much more pace than the Clio.

It has other plus points though and I'll probably have it when she is finished with it.
 
  liquid yellow 182
i had a 1998 lotus elise as my previous car and my ly 182 isnt far away from that once theyre both opened up from experience
 
  E46 M3 & UR Quattro
I agree with you.. Had a Stage 2 Corsa VXR and couldn't wait to get rid of it. I hated the bloody thing.. The clio is a far nicer car to drive IMO, I think it helps that it feels like the steering is actually connected on the Clio.
 
  Cup In bits
I agree with you.. Had a Stage 2 Corsa VXR and couldn't wait to get rid of it. I hated the bloody thing.. The clio is a far nicer car to drive IMO, I think it helps that it feels like the steering is actually connected on the Clio.

Let me guess, you got rid of it to save money\downsize.
 


Top