So, who's looking forward to the 2013 Mk4 Renaulsport Clio Williams 230 1.6t Cup?

[Skeeter]

Its all falling into place.

Renault are looking to supply Williams F1 with engines again.
1.6 Turbos are becoming the standard for WTCC, WRC and F1, so have genuine marketability with road car manufacturers who make these sort of engines.
The number of 1.6 Turbo engines for the road in development should sore, meaning they become cheaper, more reliable, and hopefully tune out the typical turbo issue with lag (talk of pre-spinning anti lag motors powered by KERS batteries!)

With 1.6 Turbos in hot hatches, and a Williams Renault F1 team on the grid, this simply has to happen doesn't it? I know I will miss the NA engines of RS Clios, but the fact is, wether we like it or not, there days are numbered.

So what do we recon, 230bhp from a 1.6 turbo in the nose of a Williams and Renaultsport engineered Clio chassis heading the Mk4 Clio RS range?

Renaultsport Clio Williams 230 Cup - I'd definitely buy one!

 

[JoedotwasT5phy]

 

[The Boosh!]

Clio will and should always remain NA imo.

Williams will never be involved with Renault Sport - it's its own brand.

 

[Jord 182]

if it revs to 18,000 rpm like the F1 im in

now that would be beyond epic.

 

[Skeeter]

Clio will and should always remain NA imo..

Now that is a pie in the sky comment. I agree I would love it to stay NA, but it simply wont happen. The rise of the turbo is unstoppable with new EU regulations and the increasing cost of fuel. Its marketing suicide for car makers to stick with NA and try to sell cars that cost more to Tax and use more fuel than the 1.6t alternatives from other manufacturers.

Its a shame, but unfortunately there's nothing we can do about it.

 

[Skeeter]

if it revs to 18,000 rpm like the F1 im in

now that would be beyond epic.

Yeah, except the 2013 F1 engine rules for 1.6 turbos have a 12,000RPM rev limit :rasp:

 

[Jord 182]

Yeah, except the 2013 F1 engine rules for 1.6 turbos have a 12,000RPM rev limit :rasp:

no one like a smart arse.

 

[The Boosh!]

Having done some research you're right. NA engines are going bye bye.

 

[Skeeter]

Having done some research you're right. NA engines are going bye bye.

Its a shame, but only because of our current opinions on turbos of limited power delivery that arrives in one big lump after an age of turbo lag.

However, I think the tides are changing and turbos are becoming more drivable. I especially like the ideas coming from F1 about using small electric motors to pre spin the turbos to remove lag, and using KERS energy to power them electrically. If the end result is something that drives like an NA, but is smaller, lighter, cheaper to tax, cheaper to fuel, and more powerfull, then its good.

 

[mace¬]

I bet the cheaper tax won't last, special tax for turbo cars I expect.

 

[Kneel]

Its a shame, but only because of our current opinions on turbos of limited power delivery that arrives in one big lump after an age of turbo lag.

However, I think the tides are changing and turbos are becoming more drivable. I especially like the ideas coming from F1 about using small electric motors to pre spin the turbos to remove lag, and using KERS energy to power them electrically. If the end result is something that drives like an NA, but is smaller, lighter, cheaper to tax, cheaper to fuel, and more powerfull, then its good.

Modern turbo's even now dont suffer that badly from turbo lag tbh. I know its an extreme but my mates Prodrive STi has virtually no lag and the power is much much smoother delivery than an old turbo car. If more people start pouring money into turbo's then we might start to see turbo technology move forward in leaps making the realities of things like compound turbo's on road cars. Now that would be truly epic

 

[Narf]

for the f1 heritage i think its a bad idea having 1.6 turbo engines but for technology and development of smaller more powerful engines its great! and the idea is to use pretty much the same technology in f1 engines as in the road cars (well in a sense)

 

[Ricardos]

Seems like it's going full circle, Renault had it right 20 years ago with the R5 running a 1.4 engine with a nice little T2 turbocharger

 

[alanc1000]

i'm glad turbos are going in tbh

 

[.Kev.]

Same here, easy power hikes

 

[Skeeter]

for the f1 heritage i think its a bad idea having 1.6 turbo engines but for technology and development of smaller more powerful engines its great! and the idea is to use pretty much the same technology in f1 engines as in the road cars (well in a sense)

This. Its a marketing gold mine. They can litterally market hot hatches as having the same engine technology as the F1 cars! Whilst they wont actually be the same engines, they will both be 4 pot 1.6 turbos. The flappy paddle gearboxes in Ferraris aren't the same as in the F1 cars, but they have made a very good marketing job of making people think they are.

I am going to miss the 18,000 RPM scream of F1, but for the long term survival of the sport through the involvement of car makers, its definately looking like 1.6 turbos will work.

 

[Matt W]

N/A revs > boost.

 

[Munson]

Lag shmag. I'd rather wait for boost than wait until 5000rpm before a whimper arrives.

It's easier to keep a turbo on boost than it is to constantly be thrashing around sounding like a boy racer.

1.4bar

 

[Skeeter]

N/A revs > boost.

Personally, I agree.

But there will come a time where you have no choice. The Turbo is here to stay.

 

[Brian172]

i hope its a hybrid tbh

 

[Munson]

Also, why do people always presume that you can't have a turbo that revs? I'm holding 1.4bar to 7200rpm. Around the same as a Clio IIRC.

 

[Gaz_]

not standard though is it?

 

[Munson]

Yeah it is. RS500 spec. The point is, a production turbo can rev. They don't all choke at 5000rpm like the Clio bandits would like everyone to believe, and you don't have to wait 20 minutes to come on boost.

 

[Will.]

Yeah it is. RS500 spec. The point is, a production turbo can rev. They don't all choke at 5000rpm like the Clio bandits would like everyone to believe, and you don't have to wait 20 minutes to come on boost.

And yet we have to wait til 5k for something to happen

 

[Turkish]

The designer responsible for the 200's front end needs his throat cut and throwing in a gravel pit somewhere. A 1.6t will be fine so long as they keep the weight down and do a decent modern take on the 5 turbo styling.

 

[Munson]

PMSL at throat cut. HBF.

 

[Matt W]

But there will come a time where you have no choice. The Turbo is here to stay.

2nd hand cars are the future.

 

[Jaff.]

with variable vane turbos these days on diesels providing no lag at all and with the technology already making its way onto higher spec petrol cars lag WILL be a thing of the past. turbos are the way forward, accept it and move on

i do like a NA screamer tho

 

[sofaboy]

If BMW M cars are going FI then I don't hold any hope for renault sticking with N/a.

 

[TomBear]

i just hope they put better turbos on the mk4 sports than they did on the mk2 dci's

 

[jesus]

Modern turbo's even now dont suffer that badly from turbo lag tbh. I know its an extreme but my mates Prodrive STi has virtually no lag and the power is much much smoother delivery than an old turbo car.

I can confirm this

 

[2 live]

Lag shmag. I'd rather wait for boost than wait until 5000rpm before a whimper arrives.

It's easier to keep a turbo on boost than it is to constantly be thrashing around sounding like a boy racer.

1.4bar

depends what you drive tbh. 85% max torque from 2500 rpm ftw.

 

[Christopher]

Clio will and should always remain NA imo.

Williams will never be involved with Renault Sport - it's its own brand.

So the next Clio will be NA?

Doubtful. Renault are already developing a 1.6T lump...

 

[Brett]

Lag shmag. I'd rather wait for boost than wait until 5000rpm before a whimper arrives.

It's easier to keep a turbo on boost than it is to constantly be thrashing around sounding like a boy racer.

1.4bar

I agree, turbo's give a wide band of useful power where as with an N/A lump (small capacity) you have to be over 5000 rpm to get it to do anything.

Turbo's are better for 90% of the time but N/A is more involving imo for the other 10% when your out for a good drive.

 

[Winged-Will]

Yeah, except the 2013 F1 engine rules for 1.6 turbos have a 12,000RPM rev limit :rasp:

15000 as far as I can see;


http://www.google.co.uk/search?sour...gc.r_pw.&fp=b922b3d9685f3663&biw=1613&bih=879

 

[Skeeter]

There V6 now not I4 too.

A rather odd choice of engine given the FIAs statements around where they want F1 to go, but thats a discussion for an F1 thread.

Still no reason to not have a Williams version of the Mk4 Clio . All I can pray for though is that its actually a mechanically different special, and not a gold/blue paintjob only special like the Gordini's have become. Unfortunately, I cant see it happening.

 

[Dunn]

Turbos are the future, and thats a fact

a 1.6t clio would be good i reckon

 

[Ian_182]

I cant see it happening,but if it does at least it wont rust for a while.

 

[Skeeter]

I cant see it happening,but if it does at least it wont rust for a while.

What part can you not see happening?

 

[SC03OTT]

I see Renault and Williams will be teaming up again in F1.