Reno 182 Newsletter

[jon_r]

For those who are not signed up:

http://www.renaultsport.co.uk/roadcars/clio182/thecar.htmhttp://www.renaultsport.co.uk/roadcars/clio182/thecar.htm

 

[Jamie]

new 182= 0/62 in 7.1
mk 2 172 cup = 0/62 in 6.7
mk 2 172 = 0/62 in 6.9

errr am i missing something here? i would have thought the new 182 would have been marginally quicker than the 172s with 10bhp more!!!

 

[rt172]

I think the mk2 172 is 6.9 to 60, 7.2 to 62 (not that it makes a big difference really!).

So thatd make the 182 about 6.9 to 60. Its only an extra 10bhp, torque appears to be remaining unchanged at 200nm.

 

[jon_r]

Quote: Originally posted by J_rt on 03 December 2003

new 182= 0/62 in 7.1
mk 2 172 cup = 0/62 in 6.7
mk 2 172 = 0/62 in 6.9

errr am i missing something here? i would have thought the new 182 would have been marginally quicker than the 172s with 10bhp more!!!





weight

 

[Dash]

Hey I have a brilliant idea !

I dont think this has ever been thought of before ?

By a brand new car like a 182 for £14 grand then strip out £7k worth of trim, and stuff it all in the back of your garage to get mouldy and damp.

Its a shame we cant ask Renault to leave various bits on the assembly line when placing our order.





If God had meant us to go so fast, he would have given us airline tickets.

 

[Rich-D]

Quote: Originally posted by Rhys on 03 December 2003


So thatd make the 182 about 6.9 to 60. Its only an extra 10bhp, torque appears to be remaining unchanged at 200nm.

Well, the 182 is most likely heavier than a mk2 172, so going off the fact that the Cup has an extra 13bhp per tonne more than a mk2, then even if the 182 weighed the same as a mk2 it would still be down on the Cup in terms of power-to-weight ratio!



With regard to the torque of the 182, it may still be the same peak of 200Nm, but it peaks lower down the rev range and is meant to have more low end grunt generally.

However, if you look at the difference between the cars we rolling roaded there can be a big difference in seemingly similar cars.

Bet mine is still more torquey than a 182

 

[blink172]

inst the 182 losing the spare and a few other bits? Meaning it should be lighter???

 

[Dash]

Quote: Originally posted by blink172 on 03 December 2003


inst the 182 losing the spare and a few other bits? Meaning it should be lighter???

I thought so too. I wonder what is making heavier? The air conditioned glovebox?

 

[Rich-D]

Quote: Originally posted by blink172 on 03 December 2003


inst the 182 losing the spare and a few other bits? Meaning it should be lighter???

But gaining other stuff, so swings & roundabouts...

The original mk2 weighed 1110kg, which is what Im basing this on, but since then it has gained ESP and cruise control which would add more weight. The 182 still gets these, plus things like an air-condiditioned glove box, wider tyres, etc... which also add weight, then God knows what else theyve tweaked./added which will all alter the weight.

Removing the spare may well bring the weight back down to neaerer the weight of the original mk2 172s but its not gonna be a lightweight model.

 

[RobFenn]

oo. Groovy.

 

[Tom]

sounds great

 

[RobFenn]

Does it?

 

[geordiepaul]

The 182 is the same weight as the 172 it says so in black and white. 1110kgs!!

 

[Rich-D]

Quote: Originally posted by geordiepaul on 03 December 2003

The 182 is the same weight as the 172 it says so in black and white. 1110kgs!!

But remember they initially said the mk2 weighed the same as the mk1 as at that point they didnt know exactly...

Well see.

 

[Dash]

And it could be a misprint that should read 182 0 - 60 in 6.5 secs ?

 

[Rich-D]

Quote: Originally posted by dash on 03 December 2003


And it could be a misprint...

Actually, I think it is!

Look at the torque figure (rpm) on that 182 spec list, then see what rpm peak torque is actually achieved at for a 182...

 

[D-CUP]

Face it, the CUP is still the quickest

 

[Dash]

Seasonal Panto mode ON

Oh no it isnt.







Runs..................................................................................................

 

[Darren555]

Quote: Originally posted by D-CUP on 03 December 2003

Face it, the CUP is still the quickest

After a mk1 you mean

 

[rt172]

Quote: Originally posted by Darren555 on 03 December 2003

Quote: Originally posted by D-CUP on 03 December 2003

Face it, the CUP is still the quickest

After a mk1 you mean

And Ill completely impartially back this statement up

 

[rt172]

Quote: Originally posted by Rich-D on 03 December 2003

Quote: Originally posted by dash on 03 December 2003


And it could be a misprint...

Actually, I think it is!

Look at the torque figure (rpm) on that 182 spec list, then see what rpm peak torque is actually achieved at for a 182...

Yup, theyve put mailto:200nm@5400rpm">200nm@5400rpm, and on the previous page said peak torque is now at 5250rpm.

 

[Rich-D]

Quote: Originally posted by Rhys on 03 December 2003

And it could be a misprint...

Actually, I think it is!

Look at the torque figure (rpm) on that 182 spec list, then see what rpm peak torque is actually achieved at for a 182...

Yup, theyve put mailto:200nm@5400rpm">200nm@5400rpm, and on the previous page said peak torque is now at 5250rpm.

Id take anything writen on that webpage with a pinch of salt...



BTW - my peak torque is actually ~4500rpm and I have more of it!

 

[yeecup]

the mk1 isnt quicker than the cup!!

 

[Steveold]

Quote: Originally posted by J_rt on 03 December 2003

new 182= 0/62 in 7.1
mk 2 172 cup = 0/62 in 6.7
mk 2 172 = 0/62 in 6.9

errr am i missing something here? i would have thought the new 182 would have been marginally quicker than the 172s with 10bhp more!!!

I think your timings are completely wrong there........ a mk2 172 is not 6.9 no way its a lot slower.....

 

[Dansta]

a cups official 0-62 time is 6.9secs and was 7.2 fo for the 172

for 0-60 it is 6.5 for the cup and 6.9 for the 172 afaik!

 

[jonnyboy]

Was reading Evo today baout the 182, they seem to have kille doff the idea of the cup which is a crying shame. The "cup" spec 172 is gonna be 14 fekkin grand! Suppose it will make the current cups a bit more specialer.

 

[Neil82]

14k? the Cup with way way less equipment was 13 k list price so aint that bad is it!

 

[STICKER TWONK]

Whats the point in a air conditioned glovebox????? If I wanted a fridge in my car Id buy a motorhome not a Clio!!!

Quote figures all day long, wait till it comes out then organise a track day and pit it against the mk1/mk2 172s, Cup, valvers and Willys of the world and see how it performs

 

[Dash]

Quote: Originally posted by zedx19 on 04 December 2003


Whats the point in a air conditioned glovebox????? If I wanted a fridge in my car Id buy a motorhome not a Clio!!!

I was also wondering what I would use this for?

A family picnic for midgets? As you say I would just take the MPV which has all the fridge stuff in the back already.

 

[jon_r]

the list on my Cup was £13.8k

 

[KDF]

I dunno, I though whats the point too, but I guess it would be okay for long trips just chuck all your drinks in the glove and whenever you go to take a drink it will be ice cold.

But ye I guess they could have just included a fridge in the boot.

 

[Rich-D]

But is this a hot hatch, or a luxury car?!

IMO theres no need for stuff like air-conditioned gloveboxs or cruise control, etc... on hot hatch, and theyre just cramming everything in there now!

Fair enough, stuff like leather, aircon, etc... is fine, no probs there, but some of this stuff is OTT

 

[Steveold]

Thing is Renaults are not exactly reliable so its really more to go wrong eh.....

 

[Tom]

Quote: Originally posted by Rich-D on 04 December 2003


But is this a hot hatch, or a luxury car?!

IMO theres no need for stuff like air-conditioned gloveboxs or cruise control, etc... on hot hatch, and theyre just cramming everything in there now!

Fair enough, stuff like leather, aircon, etc... is fine, no probs there, but some of this stuff is OTT





The basic clio (which the 182 is based on) is a supermini, go through the current spec of the c2, 206, mini, micra etc

The clio needs to be competative an a\c glove box is a gimmick that may or may not be usefull it its simply a hole in the glovebox and a pipe from the ac fan unit.

 

[dk]

As far as I am concerned, I have just ordered a 182 with the cup suspension and spoilers for £12500 + £187 + £140 which is cheaper than the RRP of the Cup and will have both the speed, all the toys and the Cups handling, so everything rolled in to one for a price which is less than the Cup, wheres the problem.

Yes it may be a fraction 0-62 slower than a cup but will look better with twin exhaust, (no need to break manufacturers warranty to change car) have all the luxury of a 172 + some and will perform at track days just as good as a Cup with a good driver behind the wheel versus a medioche cup driver (which I am sure there are some !!!).

It has the whole package. There is only one reason to buy the Cup and that is a lack of Cash, and if you find the right supplier then that isnt a problem as I have found!

This argument will go on for ever but a car is only as good as its driver.

 

[Cuppy 172]

"There is only one reason to buy the Cup and that is a lack of Cash"

What are you going on about?

 

[dk]

Other cars which are stripped out and modified for Trackdays (BMW CSL and Ferrari Stradale to name 2) cost a lot more for their racing breed, the Cup on the other hand was reduced in price to get people who couldnt afford the 172 to buy a hot clio a the difference in performance is so little you are basically buying a lightened clio and different chassis (which the 182 now has an option!). The easiest way to get the cost down was to remove all the luxury and toys which in turn made the car lighter.

This is only my opinion and as I said, this argument will never end, there will always be 172/182 people and Cuppers!

 

[KDF]

Quote: Originally posted by Cuppy 172 on 04 December 2003"There is only one reason to buy the Cup and that is a lack of Cash"What are you going on about?


I think what he is saying is

The.......Cup........is........Cheaper......than.....a......182

 

[Cuppy 172]

No, what your saying is people with cups cant afford a the luxury of a 172, Correct.

I think you will find that people on this forum have bought cups because of the car, not the lack of cash. Like you say you can get the 172/182 for roughly the same money as a cup. Think about it!!!

 

[KDF]

Well that may be what he was saying but its not my interpretation of it.

Are you gonna try and argue that the cup isnt cheaper ?