V6 255 Build Problems

[Lee16V]

Picking up the V6 on Wednesday and really excited. But, just wondered what kind of build quality I can expect???? Im sure I read somewhere that the V6 is unique to the other clios in that its put together by a seperate company outside Renault (poss TWR).

Anyway, the reason for the question is that Ive read on the forum elsewhere about peoples moans with the 172s, etc, and just wondered if I can expect the same sort of problems???

 

[Liam]

thought they were built at the renaultsport factory with the other renaultsports?

 

[Lee16V]

Im sure I read somewhere, or was told by someone (useless short-term memory) that they were built by another company like TWR, but I cant find any definite info to prove this - so maybe its not the case???

 

[SimonV6]

Quote: Originally posted by Lee16V on 14 June 2004

Im sure I read somewhere, or was told by someone (useless short-term memory) that they were built by another company like TWR, but I cant find any definite info to prove this - so maybe its not the case???

The mk1 had input from TWS, but the new one is built at same factory as 182.

here is a quote:

"New Clio V6 255 is now assembled at the Renaultsport Alpine facility in Dieppe alongside the Clio Renaultsport 182 and Cup using bodies supplied by a special department within the Clio Flins factory."

Mine seems ok build wise but having only covered 5000 miles so far only time will tell I guess??



Simon.

 

[Lee16V]

Yep, Ive just found the following website: http://www.nology.com/clio.htmlwww.nology.com/clio.html and at the bottom of the page it states that the V6 was put together by TWR in Sweden, but it does relate to the Mk1 and not the Mk2.

 

[edde]

The old Mk1 were built by TWR or someone but they went bankrupt the new ones are built on the Renault Sport line by hand (and hand painted) I think along with the 182 and Cup racers.

Build quality should be quite good Id imagine but its a Renault so check it. The V6 should be built to a quality respectful of there high cost.

 

[Mike T]

MK1 was built using tin snips to remove the excess body before panel grafting - check inside the front o/s wing of any Mk1 for a laugh.

Dieppe will be better than TWR anyday - quality control is much better despite limited runs

 

[welsh182]

Think this is a V6 in the making, back arch looks cut away with tinsnips

http://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1084134265__22.jpghttp://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1084134265__22.jpg


[Edited by welsh182 on 15 June 2004 at 12:03am]

 

[deuginthesky]

The Mk2 is built at Dieppe former Alpine Factory, with the Clio 182 and the Megane RS.

 

[Dash]

Tinsnips

Problems I had with the MK1.

Wheelarch liner creaked on full lock. No big deal.

Thats all I can think off and probably why I kept it for two years. There was nothing to moan about to make me want to get rid of it.

 

[specialK]

no probs on build from our Mk2 - and its done 9k now !

 

[Dash]

Quote: Originally posted by specialK on 15 June 2004
no probs on build from our Mk2 - and its done 9k now !



Good to see a V6 being used and enjoyed.

 

[specialK]

enjoyed it is, thats for certain

 

[sn00p]

check out the dent on the arch of the one nearest the camera. eek!

 

[Mike T]

Nice shot!!!!

They are what they are and theyre a right laugh - I wouldnt have a bad word said against mine - dodgy workmanship and all



Mike

 

[specialK]

i couldnt agree more Mike - although we havent had any problems yet

 

[V6'ing]

As for the MK1 V6 its build is quite solid, no nasty rattles. Our MK1 172 sweaks and rattles some what more than the V. The price of the car shows. I think youll be more than happy with it mate.

 

[Griff]

Quote: Originally posted by welsh182 on 15 June 2004
Think this is a V6 in the making, back arch looks cut away with tinsnipshttp://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1084134265__22.jpghttp://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1084134265__22.jpg

[Edited by welsh182 on 15 June 2004 at 12:03am]


Nope, normal Clio. Quite a few giveaways but most obviously the fuel filler hole is in the wrong place for a V6.

 

[Mike T]

its just hidden by the v6 bodykit!!

 

[Griff]

In that case where is the actual filler hole in the photos?

 

[Dash]

http://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1087281594__baf.jpg

 

[Lee16V]

Thanks guys - I feel truely reassured!!! BTW Some ace pics. I cant wait to get it now - Ive been told by the dealership that if it comes in tomorrow morning, I can pick it up in the afternoon, but if it doesnt turn up until afternoon, ill have to wait til Thursay

Looking at the pics, it looks as though someone could retro-fit the V6 arches and wings to a normal clio, therefore making it look like a V6 but with 4 seats!!! Obviously it wouldnt be like driving the real deal, but it would be a good looking practical choice for work.

 

[welsh182]

Seen a new silver V6 in Pontypridd a couple of times and it looks absolutely awesome.

If I could afford to buy and run one on my 90 mile a day commute, The tin snipped original bodywork would not bother me in the slightest, pic for info only not a criticism.

I would love one. Good luck with it.

 

[edde]

The production line photo is of a 172 Im sure as it shows a spare wheel well in the boot whereas the V6 doesnt have a spare there as the engine is in the way.

Plus where he is kneeling down there is a hole in the V6 where the engine goes so they would be standing up.

Also the V6 has a different body shell it looks like this.

http://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1087322125__err.jpg

 

[GR7]

The car nearest the bottom right hand corner of the pic has a dent in the left side underneath the rear side window - I hope they didnt leave it like that!

http://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1084134265__22.jpg

 

[Dash]

More http://sfnc.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/james/scrap.htmLink

 

[welsh182]

I was referring to the car in the bottom right of the pic where the panel is cut away up past the fuel filler hole. Perhaps Im wrong but I thought they modified standard shells into V6s.



Quote: Originally posted by edde on 15 June 2004





The production line photo is of a 172 Im sure as it shows a spare wheel well in the boot whereas the V6 doesnt have a spare there as the engine is in the way.

Plus where he is kneeling down there is a hole in the V6 where the engine goes so they would be standing up.

Also the V6 has a different body shell it looks like this.

http://erc.qmuc.ac.uk/cliosport/gallery/full/1087322125__err.jpg