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.
New versus old. Continued.
- Thread starter Clio V6 2004
- Start date
OKAY, just for you I will make it every ten minutes.Quote: Originally posted by Martin. on 17 July 2004
Let me guess youve done around 250,000 miles in those cars and on those bikes?What do want a medal? You dont have to tell us about your driving experience every five minutes!
It would, but concentrating on the 182 and Williams gives a distorted angle on the whole new versus old subject, because it is so close to its modern equivalent. The Williams is dated but good, like I keep saying.
Look at other cars though and it is much clearer how they have developed and got better, as time has gone on.
Early Caterham versus Caterham RS500 Evolution, for example. My boss has had both. The new one is a rocketship compared to the early version.
He also has had a DB2 Aston and now drives a Vanquish, I will let you guess which is better and faster. LOL.
New vs old eh? Ok sportscars....twenty years difference....
Porsche 935/78 (1978):
3.2 litre engine, 750bhp, 615nm torque and a shed load of character! Quote Derek Bell.."unbelievable in it power....what with the power and the brakes youve got an awesome car"
Porsche GT1 (1997):
3.1 litre engine, 700bhp, 550nm torque and they let Tiff Needell loose with it....
Like the 172/182 vs wiliams arguement, its obvious which is safer, has more toys etc but faster, handles better??
http://www.albertweb.de/Porsche/Typen/78_935_615x240.jpg
or
http://hogranch.com/files/Bitmaps/FIA-GT-1998/Porsche-GT1.jpg
New is better? Debateable, but youre missing the point, the new Clio looks like one huge bag of sh*t. Simple as.
And thats about as constructive as new is better
Well thats personal opinion but honestly mate, ive got videos of both and theres something very special about being in-car of a 935....more than the GT1 anyway. Honestly, its shoots flames 3/4 feet out the back, has anything between 600-800bhp adjsutable at will (depending on year)....bit brutal but very characterful...
I personally prefer newer cars which is why I have a 172. If I wanted an older car I would have bought the Williams. I am very happy with the decision I made and I would make the same choice now.
There is not a definitive answer to this question as it is based on peoples opinions which will never be the same IMHO.
Just to bring thing back into this century for a moment. Most of you know I had a V6 MK1. Great car and loved every minute of ownership.
The MK2 V6 is better, but would I buy one? No. I liked the style of my old one. All the new gadgets are very tempting, but not tempting enough if you dont like how the car looks.
Sadly you cant have it boths ways. Give me a new Williams, under warranty, with all the modern saftey aids but still the fantastic style and handling, and I would be a very happy man.
Definitely, the top one is a pig-ugly dinosaur, the bottom one awesomely attractive.Quote: Originally posted by blaupunkt on 17 July 2004
going on pure looks id pick the bottom car
Progress, once more, you see. Cars are much better looking these days, too.
Not JUST better.
Very true.
Debatable.
I parked up once, and these, pretty grown up men (had family with them etc..) said.. "Wow, theres a Williams!" and had a pretty good look.
I know which car Id rather be getting into.. if a new Clio was parked next to me. Altho, if the new Clio was a V6, then yea.. itd probably attract more good attention. The Williams IS recognised as a damn good car.. I dont think the 172/182 has had the same effect (yet.)
To be honest, the Williams is a better car, isnt it?
As purely a drivers car! The only part it looses out in is newness, but then, does newness affect the drive? Not sure.. Id say not.Maybe we should come back in another 10 years.. and see if people are defending the now new Clios.. as much as people are defending the Williams now..
Im sorry, i dont agree with either of the above comments. I was actually up to my mate yesterday whose a renault salesman - hes got a 182 at the moment - silver with anthracite wheels, cup pack etc and it looks damn fine...i mean really nice. To park it next to mine, its obvious which is the newer but for road presence (looks wise anyway) the 16v nails it. I mean picture the scene....
average member of the public driving along spots a clio tearing it up behind them; if its a 172/182 they think "a quick car but its just a clio". If its a 16v/willy they think "thats more than just a clio [spots bonnet bulge]".
Point is the the 172/182, despite being a very good looking car, has no distinguising feature to make it really stand out. To the vast majority of the public (who dont know cars) you could dress a 1.2 with alloys and theyd swear it was the same. With the 16v however, theres no confusion that its something out of the ordinary...something to be wary of. With this in mind i think they both look good but for different reasons; the 172/182 for subtlety, the 16v for in you face, pumped up styling - both good i think youll agree....
[Edited - meant this to be posted before Daz comment!]
The Williams and 16Vs are still real head turners....but so is my 172, lots of people look and comment on it!
After years and years driving older cars and being on first name terms with the local RAC men...theres no way Id give up my 172 for an older car again, but Id love a Willy or 16V for a weekend car!!
Give me minnor 172 problems over expensive older car problems anyday!!
But then given a choice of spending a huge wad of cash on a mint older car, it always comes back to the fact that you can get a newer car for the same money.....then you start looking at newer cars again!
Yeah true but you know basically what im saying; having a 172/182 coming up behind you and it could be any model 1.2-2.0ltr. Having a valver coming up behind you and you know its something a bit different. Regardless of whether someone thinks its a 1.2 with a modd bonnet or actually knows what it is, it stands out from the crowd.
dont mean it to sound like this but what a load of asbsolute tosh! your trying to say that when a 10 year old valver is in my rear view it stand out from the crowd and i know its something special. Well thats wrong coz the only give away to me is the bonnet bulge, there aint anything else that car has when looking from infront that is noticeably different. They look like a standard 1.4rt with bonnet bulge. Now you go drive a 172/182 into your town and see how much attention it gets. You wont need a loud exhaust on your car anymore, so instead of the dirty looks youve been used to, ull find that people wave & smile
, especially the ladies.you clearly do not know what you are talking about pal and are sounding like a stuck record. FYI the 1.4 RT does not have a bonnet bulge. It does not have flared arches front and back. It has a narrower track. The splitter is different and not as low... All of these things make the valver/willy have more character and presence than the RT. Id say thats more distinguishing features than the 172 has over the 1.2 etc.
Haha - i tell ya, this thread has been the highlight of this weekend m8! lol
Bizarrely, i dont actually have a bean can zorst on my valver and my car looks near standard but believe me, it still gets looks and respect. All im trying to say is that if you catch a quick glimpse of either car, its more evident that the 16v is something a bit different. The 172/182 while being good looking just isnt as different to its 1.2 relatives as the willy/16v is to its 1.2 relatives. Now obviously those who know will probably recognise either but to 75% of the population, if you asked them which looked a bit out of the ordinary, theyd say 16v/willy.
i know what im talking about. Ive had and driven most of the Renault range. I know the difference between all models on most makes.i know the differences between rn & rt and never once mentioned the 1.4 rt has a bonnet bulge.Think you know what I mean about the attention thow, if you took your exhaust sound away, there would hardly be any people looking at your car, trust me.theyve seen the on the road for the last 10 years.A 172 or 182 or V6 now were talking.
Hmm, My car was parked up.. I was walking towards it and this bloke (dunno how old, but was with a few other people) said "Wow, its a Williams.."
It was parked in the middle of 2 other cars.. all he could have seen was a bit of the rear arch, gold wheels and the Williams badge on the back..
Now, he noticed it, from every other car parked there.. the engine wasnt running or anything, it was silent.. yet, he still said "Wow!"..
let me guess, youve driven all Renos and done almost 250000 miles too? lmaoQuote: Originally posted by 182 sport on 18 July 2004
i know what im talking about. Ive had and driven most of the Renault range. I know the difference between all models on most makes.i know the differences between rn & rt and never once mentioned the 1.4 rt has a bonnet bulge.Think you know what I mean about the attention thow, if you took your exhaust sound away, there would hardly be any people looking at your car, trust me.theyve seen the on the road for the last 10 years.A 172 or 182 or V6 now were talking.
yeah, the williams doesnt stand out at all without the exhaust note, it just looks sooo common. My m8 once asked me if it was just an RN with a different bonnet, track, front & rear bumper, wider arches, gold alloys, decals, interior and a different backbox. of course i had to tell him the truth, yeah its one of those mass produced cars for the general public, theres so many now tho its pissing me off, everywhere I turn all I see are Williams Clios... damn they look so standard, ill go buy one of those 172 things, not keen on it being a 1.2 tho... my m8 assured me the 172 was a 2.0l but I was having none of it
20VT Clio & 9-5 HOT
my mum cant tell the difference between a billabong and a 172 most of the time
, but she knows when she sees a valver or williams with the wide arches, bonnet bulge, and general mean looks.2 172s died at santa pod yesterday as well. big time fuked!
mine broke too on the way to the shell station, but only the clutch cable snapped after 11 years of use
there was a V6 there as well, was dying for a race, but they neva raced! it! Boooo!
My mum cant tell the difference between a billabong and a 172 most of the time
,but she knows when she sees a valver or williams the the loud exhaust and gold alloys, and general boy racer looks.2 172s died at santa pod yesterday as well.big time fuked!
We must all have 2 minutes silence please.
only the other week i had washed my williams at work, then parked it bang outside our showroom doors, were we also have a 182(cup options) and a 225 megane in orange! i left it there not running of course and went to get cleaned up, when i came back, i found several people looking round my car, saying the same thing! wow a williams! i was stood for 30+mins talking to people about it despite wanting to go home!
