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.

Re-Map Clio 1.4 Sport



  clio 1.4 sport
Hi Guys,

I was just wondering if anybody has ever known a Clio 1.4 sport 2000 model (think its the mark 2 phase 1?) to be remapped.

Do you think it would make much difference?

Thanks

Stephen
 
  Nissan 350z
Yeah RSTuning list the 1.4 16vs as able to be remapped. I imagine bringing it closer to the 1.6 in terms of performance as theres little between them anyway.
 
  Nissan 350z
The 1.4 16v and the 1.6 16v are basiaclly the same engine anyway.

According to RSTuner:
Orginal BHP : 98 HP
Tuned BHP : 108 HP
Orginal NM : 127 NM
Tuned NM : 141 NM
 
  '06 MK3 Clio 1.4L
Crazy good gains from remapping a dci!

Defo want one for my next car.

I have a Clio DCI 80

Performance exhaust, K&N panel filter and a tdi-tuning.co.uk diesel tuning box bringing it to around 110bhp :)

Further gains could be made by changing turbos, intercoolers etc...
 
  dCi 65 + C2 (<Sold)
I have a Clio DCI 80

Performance exhaust, K&N panel filter and a tdi-tuning.co.uk diesel tuning box bringing it to around 110bhp :)

Further gains could be made by changing turbos, intercoolers etc...

My dad has a 65, but he isn't the type to go modifying it lol. Still a good drive standard though.
 

Ali

  V6, Trackhawk, GTS
Not concivinced...Think of it this way...20bhp is BAREly noticely about...1-2car lengths max whilst side by side...You really think 3-6bhp will make a difference.

You money money, assumptions or no i'd rathee spend 250 on wine'in and Din'in the wee man ^^
 
  Nissan 350z
Not concivinced...Think of it this way...20bhp is BAREly noticely about...1-2car lengths max whilst side by side...You really think 3-6bhp will make a difference.

You money money, assumptions or no i'd rathee spend 250 on wine'in and Din'in the wee man ^^

Well seeing how RSTuning is taken as gospel what with their RR. Their site states a remapped 1.4 16v gives a 10bhp increase. Thats a bigger gain than the 8bhp on 172 remaps!

So by your logic 172 mapping is even more useless?
 

Ali

  V6, Trackhawk, GTS
Well seeing how RSTuning is taken as gospel what with their RR. Their site states a remapped 1.4 16v gives a 10bhp increase. Thats a bigger gain than the 8bhp on 172 remaps!

So by your logic 172 mapping is even more useless?

Correct. 10bhp my hole!
 
  1.6 Focus, 1.6 122S
Why do people keep saying its a waste of money, have any of you actully owned a 1.4/1.6 16v?
 
  Audi A3
my mate had a 1.4 16v 2000 he never got round to mapping it before he sold it but il admit with a few others it wasnt near a 172 or 182 obviously but it was still damn quick would have liked to have seen it mapped....
 
  Golf GT TDI
Why do people keep saying its a waste of money, have any of you actully owned a 1.4/1.6 16v?

because its never going to be a flying machine is it? honestly?
my friend has a 1.4 16v dyna+ 2001

a good holiday somewhere hot with lots of half naked girls sounds a better plan:cool:
 
  182
it is worth it!

10bhp on a car with very little to start with is going to be noticed lads

its a near enough 10% increase. come on
 
  1.6 Focus, 1.6 122S
because its never going to be a flying machine is it? honestly?
my friend has a 1.4 16v dyna+ 2001

a good holiday somewhere hot with lots of half naked girls sounds a better plan:cool:

lol, well yes, naked girls is always going to be better.

However I dissagree on not being worth it.

On Sprint Tracks and local Meets I was able to keep up with the 2.0's A well modded 1.4 16v is about 125 bhp per ton, it can be increased further but you start get spend lots!

From a valve for money/fun point of view it is far cheaper to run a modded 1.4 for 3 fun years rather than unmodded bordem for 2 and a 172 for 1, no?
 
  Golf GT TDI
lol, well yes, naked girls is always going to be better.

However I dissagree on not being worth it.

On Sprint Tracks and local Meets I was able to keep up with the 2.0's A well modded 1.4 16v is about 125 bhp per ton, it can be increased further but you start get spend lots!

From a valve for money/fun point of view it is far cheaper to run a modded 1.4 for 3 fun years rather than unmodded bordem for 2 and a 172 for 1, no?


i guess. how much would it cost to map a 1.4/1.6?

there is always the internet for naked girls:eek:
 
  Italian 3.2 V6
i would remap a 1.6, but not a 1.4 unless alot of weight loss, chasis tuning etc was going to be involved...
 
  Clio 182
Wrong.

2000, 1.4S is 1.4 8v.

I think there were 2 or 3 different models in this range though, the S and the Si wasn't it, different models in the 'sport' category? and in the 1.4 and 1.6 I think.

I am trying to remember, I bought one new a 2001 1.4 Si 16v and there was a cheaper one than mine but still under the 'sport' range, it was a really good, surprisingly nippy car for the size and handled better than the 182. That is maybe where the 8v/16v difference is coming in.
 
Last edited:
  1.6 Focus, 1.6 122S
i would remap a 1.6, but not a 1.4 unless alot of weight loss, chasis tuning etc was going to be involved...

Why not teh 1.4? They are identical cars, but teh 1.4 is cheaper to buy and run? Also the 1.4 is eaiser to tune imo.
 
  Italian 3.2 V6
Yes It's slightly cheaper, but I'd pay the little extra for the 1.6 as u would always have that little extra punch... Just a personal opinion as I owned a 2004 1.4 16v before I bought the 172, always wished I'd paid that little extra for 1.6! Tbh I would of thought 1.6 would also have more tunning potential over the 1.4...
 


Top