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.
len_beach
ClioSport Club Member
E92 M3,172 track car
Driven properly, the 1*2 all day long. Certain individuals will tell you that on the third tuesday of every month, when you have your flux capacitor only half full and you start your car in reverse without changing down a gear at 22mph in fourth, the Golf will be quicker but in the 'real' world with 'real' drivers, the Clio will always win.
Can of worms BTW.
Can of worms BTW.
Nissan 350Z
Oh god, not this again 
I've owned a fabia vRS. I've also "benchmarked" my 182 against one on a PH meet. The outcome, not surprisingly, is that the 182 is a much faster car.
Anyone who says otherwise either isnt driving a 182 properly, or is talking s**t.
I've owned a fabia vRS. I've also "benchmarked" my 182 against one on a PH meet. The outcome, not surprisingly, is that the 182 is a much faster car.
Anyone who says otherwise either isnt driving a 182 properly, or is talking s**t.
brisa4984
ClioSport Club Member
tdi golf over 182.. ure having a laugh..
182 would beat it for sure..then take it to the twisties and buuurr bye!
there was a limited edition 180 tdi tho i think.. and even that i think the clio has it.
182 would beat it for sure..then take it to the twisties and buuurr bye!
there was a limited edition 180 tdi tho i think.. and even that i think the clio has it.
its a 170 tdi, not a special edition, just uprated. £21k new
len_beach
ClioSport Club Member
E92 M3,172 track car
I've done a similar thing with a mapped VRS. The VRS had a slight edge up until around 25mph but the Clio soon clawed this back (once I'd wiped the black soot from my eyesOh god, not this again
I've owned a fabia vRS. I've also "benchmarked" my 182 against one on a PH meet. The outcome, not surprisingly, is that the 182 is a much faster car.
Anyone who says otherwise either isnt driving a 182 properly, or is talking s**t.
). After this, the Clio was definately quicker but not by a massive margin. They're good cars in the right hands and when used for the right reasons.brisa4984
ClioSport Club Member
ahh ok ^
Nissan 350Z
Thing is, i found the fuel consumption disappointing in my vRS when i had it, compared to what i thought it would be.
Unfortunately, it seems a lot of owners of these cars have delusions of grandeur, and believe that their cars can out-accelerate almost anything on the road thanks to their ebay tuning box, while returning 70 MPG while being thrashed.
The reality however, is somewhat different. The remapped ones are quite quick, but in reality, it brings their performance up from being warm (despite feeling deceptively accelerative due to its completely unsubtle, lumpy power delivery), up to being as quick as some standard hot hatches.
The problem is however, even when you give them this performance, they are compromised by their dull engine notes, appalling throttle response, nose heavy handling, and odd power delivery. Also, remapped ones eat their clutches when driven like people tend to like to drive diesels (that is, showing people how fast they go from low revs in 5th or 6th). Ask any VAG TDI enthusiast how common slipping clutches are in these cars. Or heatsoaking intercoolers on the TDI130s.
Ah but the economy, I keep hearing them bleat on about. Believe me, its not as good as people will have you believe. On a run, sure they'll get into the 50s. However, I drove mine at a similar overall pace to my clio on a day to day basis around town and on the lanes, and it generally returned mid to high 30's, where i will get around 29 - 30 MPG out of the clio.
Now thats not much better in my book, particularly when i was led to believe that i would get 50+ even when thrapping it (and why you would want to drive it like this when its so unsatisfying to do so escapes me). Add to that, the shorter service intervals (every 10k miles instead of 12k) and todays higher cost in diesels, mean that in reality the 182 actually doesnt cost that much extra to run.
Having had experience of one, i can see well and truly through this modern diesel hype. They are only any good for sitting on motorways all day. Any keen driver will prefer a petrol, and anyone who doesnt sit on a motorway all day will not realise much benefit.
Unfortunately, it seems a lot of owners of these cars have delusions of grandeur, and believe that their cars can out-accelerate almost anything on the road thanks to their ebay tuning box, while returning 70 MPG while being thrashed.
The reality however, is somewhat different. The remapped ones are quite quick, but in reality, it brings their performance up from being warm (despite feeling deceptively accelerative due to its completely unsubtle, lumpy power delivery), up to being as quick as some standard hot hatches.
The problem is however, even when you give them this performance, they are compromised by their dull engine notes, appalling throttle response, nose heavy handling, and odd power delivery. Also, remapped ones eat their clutches when driven like people tend to like to drive diesels (that is, showing people how fast they go from low revs in 5th or 6th). Ask any VAG TDI enthusiast how common slipping clutches are in these cars. Or heatsoaking intercoolers on the TDI130s.
Ah but the economy, I keep hearing them bleat on about. Believe me, its not as good as people will have you believe. On a run, sure they'll get into the 50s. However, I drove mine at a similar overall pace to my clio on a day to day basis around town and on the lanes, and it generally returned mid to high 30's, where i will get around 29 - 30 MPG out of the clio.
Now thats not much better in my book, particularly when i was led to believe that i would get 50+ even when thrapping it (and why you would want to drive it like this when its so unsatisfying to do so escapes me). Add to that, the shorter service intervals (every 10k miles instead of 12k) and todays higher cost in diesels, mean that in reality the 182 actually doesnt cost that much extra to run.
Having had experience of one, i can see well and truly through this modern diesel hype. They are only any good for sitting on motorways all day. Any keen driver will prefer a petrol, and anyone who doesnt sit on a motorway all day will not realise much benefit.
VRS
the more you tell me about your experiences the more i think i should just buy a megane 230 R26!
len_beach
ClioSport Club Member
E92 M3,172 track car
I think this sums them up. A friend of mine has had a 54 plate Leon Cupra TDI from new. He loves it and it is his third diesel in as many years. He does approx 75 miles each day on his round trip just to work and back. He recently bought his fiancee a 172. She is covering the same distance each day and she is returning around 45mpg. When Phil gets a chance, he takes the Clio over the Leon every time, as long as there is not a long motorway commute involved. Where there is any real driving involved, the Clio is the car to drive. When there is any distance to cover, the Clio is not the car to drive.
Last edited:
BMW M4; S1000 RR
Oh god... Another one.
Look, turbo diesels are great, but race one that's heavy with floaty handling against a "hot hatch" that is meant to be good at 0-60 and corners, it will lose.
BTW, regarding the economy.
I used to keep a 120d sport, 220bhp, 150mph, 30mpg... 182 no chance.
Even with my DCi, 110bhp, you'd be looking at 30mpg at best if you were trying to keep up.
BTW stop regarding the VRS as a statuate car. It sucks Sure, loads of power, but it's peaky, then again, so is the Clio. Why can't they all do it beamer style ?
Look, turbo diesels are great, but race one that's heavy with floaty handling against a "hot hatch" that is meant to be good at 0-60 and corners, it will lose.
BTW, regarding the economy.
I used to keep a 120d sport, 220bhp, 150mph, 30mpg... 182 no chance.
Even with my DCi, 110bhp, you'd be looking at 30mpg at best if you were trying to keep up.
BTW stop regarding the VRS as a statuate car. It sucks
Sure, loads of power, but it's peaky, then again, so is the Clio. Why can't they all do it beamer style ?
BMW M4; S1000 RR
330d contemplater...
Can the megane keep up with an M3 ??? Then it certainly won't keep up with a remapped 330d. This my friend is the gospel.
Nissan 350Z
The BMW is a very heavy car. Yes it would win if it had 220 bhp, but not by a huge margin. Give the Clio 220 bhp, i'm sure the outcome would be different
At the end of the day though, it s not about speed, its about enjoyment. Theres lots of fast diesels around, but they still belch out black fumes, still have poor throttle responses, still have odd power deliveries, and still sound like tractors.
At the end of the day though, it s not about speed, its about enjoyment. Theres lots of fast diesels around, but they still belch out black fumes, still have poor throttle responses, still have odd power deliveries, and still sound like tractors.
Oh god... Another one.
Look, turbo diesels are great, but race one that's heavy with floaty handling against a "hot hatch" that is meant to be good at 0-60 and corners, it will lose.
BTW, regarding the economy.
I used to keep a 120d sport, 220bhp, 150mph, 30mpg... 182 no chance.
Even with my DCi, 110bhp, you'd be looking at 30mpg at best if you were trying to keep up.
BTW stop regarding the VRS as a statuate car. It sucks
what about a merc E320 cdi - they are class as well
remapped and with a forge the reno is a guid shout. Im just sick of the overpriced shitey 3series iv looked it.
BUT im not done yet!!
dont worry the antandpete website whetted my whistle!!!!!!!!!!
Nissan 350Z
One more thing... the more performance you are giving some of these diesels, the worse the fuel economy is getting on them.
I know people with Audi's with the VAG V6 TDI in them and they only get into the 30's at best. Yet, they still dont drive as nice as the petrol variant, and, when you can afford a car like this, why settle for a soot chucker?
I know people with Audi's with the VAG V6 TDI in them and they only get into the 30's at best. Yet, they still dont drive as nice as the petrol variant, and, when you can afford a car like this, why settle for a soot chucker?
BMW M4; S1000 RR
I'm sure the outcome would be different giving the fact that a Clio weighs less than the BMW without brakes, wheels or glass...
I think factoring the money spent on bringing a 182 up to 220bhp, the 120d could be seeing 250 plus... It goes on and on, there's always someone faster, infact there's a lot of people faster than any Clio or 1 series... However, given that you can relax in the 1, heated leather seats et all, I'd take it everytime.
And R20 CWH.....
A merc diesel ?? Class ?? Are you kidding ??
I think factoring the money spent on bringing a 182 up to 220bhp, the 120d could be seeing 250 plus... It goes on and on, there's always someone faster, infact there's a lot of people faster than any Clio or 1 series... However, given that you can relax in the 1, heated leather seats et all, I'd take it everytime.
And R20 CWH.....
A merc diesel ?? Class ?? Are you kidding ??
BMW M4; S1000 RR
lol did you contact Ant ???
Ask him and he might be able to find you the car that you overlooked
172 ff
to end this argument, ive had a 182, and i have a Golf GT TDI tuned to around 200Bhp. let me tell you the golf is not as quick off the mark, its not a huge difference but the turbo lag is rediculous at the wrong rev range and it quickly runs out of steam before having to change. its very torquey but due to the size and weight of it, it makes this a pointless topic.
yes runs out of steam - very much so, the 105 ps 1,9 i binned about in that a friend has as a company car was absolute gammon!!!!!!
BMW M4; S1000 RR
The 1 series gave an average of 30.2 mpg... Not bad considering it would be doing an average speed of 100 on motorway trips.
I think they drive nicer than the petrol equivalents, and for me, there's no question, obviously some people get confused when they see the revs only go up to 6k though....
BTW, I couldn't give a monkeys about fuel consumption, it's just a happy coincedence I have my diesel paid for... Think I've gone through £1800s worth in the last few months, now change that to petrol, would be something like £2500, and I would have had to pay for it
BMW M4; S1000 RR
Born and bred :rasp: I just hate Merc interiors and general styling.
Lots of respect for the likes of SL55s, hell, even the E55 deserves a mention, but they're not driver's cars in my opinion.
len_beach
ClioSport Club Member
E92 M3,172 track car
hopefully ill unearth a 330d for a decent price soonish.
there was a W plate 4 miles from me with only 61k on the clock, 184 bhp tho (boooo!!), black, full leather, auto, FBMWSH. Yours for £9,500.
b*****d missed it by 10minutes the guy said.
BMW M4; S1000 RR
BMW M4; S1000 RR
