Opinions going from 172 -> R27 197?

[Chris_786]

As above folks really, after thinking about bits I wanted to buy for the 172, brembo's, recaro's, cams etc etc I suddenly realised that if I sold all my bits and bobs on with my works bonus in Feb I could just buy a nicer car (R27) seen them for around £8K ish mark.

Anyone made this move? Whats the crack? Missed the 172/182?

Thanks, Chris.

 

[Sanders]

Quite a few have made the move,i went from 172 to a 200, i only miss the rawness of my old 172 and the fuel economy, it doesn't feel as quick but its a much bigger car.

 

[Martin_172]

i went from ph2 172 to ph1 172 to 200.

would never in a million years go back. 172's were great in their day and will still happily keep pace with a 200 in a straight line but the 200 has a cracker of a chassis, awesome brakes, no rattles, recaros are awesome and they are a much nicer place to be.

 

[.Kev.]

If you have the funds I'd go straight to the 200, if not £8k will get you a nice motor be if French or something else.

 

[Chris_786]

Cheers guys, Only have £8k ish to play with really. Dont want to borrow money off anyone, I dont like oweing monies which is a good thing I think...

I keep thinking of other cars but then I think, I love these little clio's! Not a lot else to match it pound for pound.

 

[Wests Renault]

Quite a few of us (inc myself) have gone from 1*2 to 200 and back again.

Just not as fun/raw IMO and also drink fuel like it's going out of fashion!

 

[Martin_172]

fuel consumption is horrendous! i should have mapped and repped the gt lol!!

 

[Chris_786]

fuel consumption is horrendous! i should have mapped and repped the gt lol!!

Really that bad? I get 33-36mpg average driving whats the 197 likely to be??

 

[Martin_172]

ive generally found subtract 10 from your 172/182 figure, maby thats just me, ive never worked them out properly im just going like for like on what the trip computers say

 

[Sanders]

I average 28 in the 200, many get much less lol

 

[alanc1000]

I went from 172-182-197. It depends on what you look for in a car, but overall the 197 is way better than the 172 - it handles better, brakes are better, built better, etc etc. Its a totally different car.

The difference between the 197 and 200 has pretty much now been proven as the same between the 172 and 182 - i.e f**k all. People would like to think the 200 is better than the 197, in the same way as they wanted to think the 182 was better than the 172, but now the marketing hype / journalist hype has vanished, the reality is that there really is bugger all in it.

These days i can see how the 172 would make a better track day car or second weekend car, but no way is it better as a main car.

 

[Martin_172]

im genuinely interested in a shot of a 197 to see if the 200 really is as it was advertised as 20% more low down torque or what ever they said it had as im surprized how pokey mine is under 3000rpm, wish it was quite as urgent from 3000rpm to 5000rpm, feels a bit weak mid range then goes nuts at 6000rpm!

 

[alanc1000]

im genuinely interested in a shot of a 197 to see if the 200 really is as it was advertised as 20% more low down torque or what ever they said it had as im surprized how pokey mine is under 3000rpm, wish it was quite as urgent from 3000rpm to 5000rpm, feels a bit weak mid range then goes nuts at 6000rpm!

All the test cars / review cars for the 197 were on the early ECU maps, the 197s all had patch upgrades to sort out idling issues and flat spots in around 2008 which also gave more lower down torque, so its no wonder the early 197 press cars were always slated as having not a great amound of lower down torque, and that the 200s were (in the eyes of the motor press) much more improved. I am sure the 200 is tweeked further still, but TBH when you are talking about half a second here or there on paper figs, then handling etc comes in to play much more. Evo said that the 200 was 2 secs faster around bedford west than the 197 - but at the same time the car they seemed to prefer (the 182) was 2 secs slower than the 197 around the same track, so its all swings and roundabouts.

 

[Ol’ Tarby]

Mazda 3 MPS

 

[Gazzman_Clio]

I love mine, i went from a 133 and dont regret it, i think my average 28mpg with mixed driving.

 

[MarkCup]

I went from a 172 Cup to a non-cup 200.

The 200 is not as raw, nor as ultimately chuckable as a 172, but once you recalibrate your senses they are just as much fun, if not more.

As for fuel...I haven't seen that much of a difference. Managed to get a genuine 42mpg out of it recently over 200 miles of commuting. I think it's because they don't 'feel' as fast everyone drives everywhere flat out. You don't have to in a 200, drive it at six tenths and it's just as quick as a 172 driven in a similar manner.

 

[Emz_197]

We own a 172 and a 197. I much prefer the 197, nicer place to be, more comfortable, better driving position etc but mpg isn't as good.

 

[MikeLYR27]

I had a 182, sold it for an R27, just recently got a 182 as a run around so i have both. 197/R27 is imo a much better place to be. 182 feels marginally better low down, but the 197 revs much better and feels more powerful to be honest. The 182 fizzles out a bit really. Both great cars, love driving my 182 everyday, had some great drives but the 197 just does it better for me. Better car but also different drives as well!

 

[Chris_786]

Cool great reviews everyone, well looks like come feb/march I will be selling up and back to standard.

Mike isn't your car supercharged? Bet it goes like stink!

 

[Martin_172]

also worth adding not sure about the 197 but the 200 cup chassis is MURDER on the road unless your on a lovely new bit of road! imo its a bit to stiff for your average uk road, and becomes a pain if you end up doing any long motorway journeys!

 

[BIGASH]

Depends what you want from the car Chris, I have had both an R27 and a 182 they are very different really as said above. The R27 was a much nicer place to be very chilled and personally I didn't think the suspension was that hard at all! The 182 is a different proposition really and in the 1000 miles I did in it before it got stripped down it was a great car but a lot more raw than the R27.

I think anyone could jump in the 197 and drive it quickly but the 182 requires more involvement to drive at 100% but it rewards you for it more than the 197. All IMO

 

[MarkCup]

The non-cup 200 suspension is perfect in every single way!

Except you don't get red calipers, nor can you brag that you have ultra hard cup suspension

 

[Chris_786]

Lol stiff suspension won't bother me, it will probly end up on coilovers anyway to be honest! I just want something that looks a little more grown up, will keep pace, not as noisy (I know I have a yozza but the car rattles and shakes and there is generally a lot of road noise)

I had a play with a GW 197 last night and although I JUST had the legs on it it's put my mind at rest that they are no slouch.

 

[Martin_172]

after years of stiff suspension running loads of different manufacturers of coils/springs/dampers i dont think any of them are as stiff as the cup suspension lol. on a smooth road its fine but throwing it down a backroad at serious pace you get thrown about far to much in car which takes your concentration off the driving, possibly thats just the roads we have here (or im a hooligan) but i dont imagine the rest of the uk to be much better.

My GT's ride was much better for that sort of driving just a little to much to the soft side (fine for what it was) so id imagine non cup would be perfect, however ive never driven one.

it was the one option that i said was a must for any 200 i was going to buy, dont think id spec it in future though (again id need to test both cars to see what i think)

 

[Harpham]

Quite a few of us (inc myself) have gone from 1*2 to 200 and back again.

Just not as fun/raw IMO and also drink fuel like it's going out of fashion!

This tbh. I went from a Ph2 172 to 200 Cup and then back to Ph1 172. The only thing I regret is ever selling my Ph2. The 1*2's are much more fun on a daily basis.

 

[Sir_Dave]

Managed to get a genuine 42mpg out of it recently over 200 miles of commuting.

What sort of speeds were you doing Mark, i get 35mpg sat at 75-85 in the Trophy? Everyone else seems to get appalling fuel economy in the 200's compared. Shame as i really like them, but with sub 30 mpg there is literally no point me even contemplating one.

 

[Chris_786]

I've been told on 197.net that they read 4mpg under what they achieve? So working it out properly you get more mpg than the onboard calculates?

 

[Scara]

Here's my twopence worth :race: I drive these 2 at the moment.


I don't seem to be able to find a great difference between the 2 fuel consumption wise, the 197 is non cup and the 200 is a Cup chassis. I prefer the cup chassis to be honest but that's my opinion, down to choice I suppose. Its quite surprising how different though I find the two cars the 197 is a lot noisier /raw than the 200, but the 200 for me is a nicer place to be and I think looks better again though personal choice :rasp:.
I seem to be able to chuck the 197 around a lot easier and treat it quite harshly but maybe that's me being kind on the 200 as its newer.Never driven a 1*2 of any description so I have nothing to compare these against.So Really I love them both but in different ways.One is like a mistress and the other my wife

 

[MarkCup]

I've found this..under reads 2-3 mpg for me.

Speed wise for me it's all country roads so peaks of 60-70mph but 'cruising' pace is more like 40-50mph.

The reason I get such good economy though is that I never press the brake pedal...26 miles home from work the other night, and I gently brushed the brake pedal a total of 7 times from startup to shutting it off in my drive.

 

[Sir_Dave]

Speed wise for me it's all country roads so peaks of 60-70mph but 'cruising' pace is more like 40-50mph.

The reason I get such good economy though is that I never press the brake pedal...26 miles home from work the other night, and I gently brushed the brake pedal a total of 7 times from startup to shutting it off in my drive.

Ah right, so very smooth driving (like me) & slower speeds hence the better mpg, makes sense.

I get impression that as soon as you go above 70, the 200 really drops off, what sort of revs is it doing at say 85 in 6th?

Think the Trophy is at about 4k rpm.

 

[Martin_172]

The reason I get such good economy though is that I never press the brake pedal...26 miles home from work the other night, and I gently brushed the brake pedal a total of 7 times from startup to shutting it off in my drive.

i enjoy the brakes to much for that haha! cant wait to wear out a set of pads to try some ds2500 or what ever the "pad of choice" is for these!

 

[MarkCup]

Rev in 6th equate to pretty much the same as the revs in 5th in my 172 Cup i.e. 2k rpm at 40mph, 4k rpm at 80mph.

Bigger frontal area though so needs to make a bigger hole, more rolling resistance from 215 tyres, and more mass to accelerate up to speed in the first place.

Get gready with the acceleration, or with the speed you require and it is always going to deliver less mpg.

I'm just fortunate now that I have a commute to die for; no traffic, no stops, and great scenery

 

[Martin_172]

thats the sort of commute you can have a riot on and still get decent mpg, i used to have one like that and covering ground quickly i was getting better mpg than i was sat on the motorway at 70mph as it was quick bursts of acceleration to get a bit of speed and then feathering the throttle, no brakes though the bends, wasnt half quick in going through tyres though lol!

 

[leeds_182]

I made the move and regretted it.

 

[Neild]

Where are you located mate, im across in Fife and you are more than welcome to come over and have a little run in my 197, imo i have had a 172, 182 and i wouldnt go back

 

[Scott™]

Right my opinion.

I made the jump from 172 cup to 197 FF a few months ago now.

The 197 looks 100x better and modern with its interior and exterior. It sounds so much better with the exhaust IMO. It handles so much better, brakes so much better. BUT.

And there is a big but, It doesn't satisfy me like the cup did. It's so smooth and well sluggish... You need to rev the tits off it to get anything and the throttle response is shocking. The MPG is rubbish and if you want something that feels quick the 197 isn't for you. Top end it is quicker than the 172 but getting there I don't think it is. 8k is a lot of money for a car and if I could spend mine again, I'd get something else. As much as I love the 197.

 

[not normal dan]

i did exactly the same tbh, at first i missed the rawness of my old 172 an it felt like a totally different car to drive but now i've had it a few months and got used to it I love my 197. The handling is amazing compared to my old 172 (which was on coilovers) the fuel economy isn't quite as good but at the end of the day the so called "hot hatchs", if i wanted economy i would of brought a diesel! In my opinion one of best things i did.

 

[Chris_786]

Thanks everyone!

Think my minds made up on looks alone, I'm going to start selling my stuff off my 172 and save towards a LY R27.
I'll be looking to buy come April/March time...

Other cars that crossed my mind where...
-BMW Z4 2.2
-Megane 230 R26
-Porsche Boxter 2.7
-Golf GTi Mk5

 

[Scott™]

Have a read through this thread mate. Some very good points raised.

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?595235-197-Pros-and-Cons

 

[Martin_172]

im with scott. throttle responce is shocking on it, not sure if its something that can be mapped out