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.
V6 v 1*2 ..?
- Thread starter Šįk
- Start date
® Andy
ClioSport Club Member
Illiad V6 255
Mk2 Vee is easily sub-6.0 seconds to 60. 5.8 seconds officially, but in my experience if you nail the start well you're talking around 5.5 second, and then into 3rd at 65+. My 172 was nippy, but it wasn't that fast in a straight line. Above 60 then the Vee would start pulling ahead more.
Obviously chuck a corner in tho' and I can assure you I ease off more in the Vee than the 172 because you're never quite so sure
.
Vee isn't about that tho'.
Obviously chuck a corner in tho' and I can assure you I ease off more in the Vee than the 172 because you're never quite so sure
.Vee isn't about that tho'
.
Golf R soon...
V6 Clio is all about the looks and noise TBH.
They are pretty quick though! Not slow by any means.
I could have had a V6 clio after my 182 but I decided to get an R32 instead...not I don't think I could go back to anything French simply because of the reliablility (of my 182 anyways) and the rattles!
They are pretty quick though! Not slow by any means.
I could have had a V6 clio after my 182 but I decided to get an R32 instead...not I don't think I could go back to anything French simply because of the reliablility (of my 182 anyways) and the rattles!
Mk2 Vee is easily sub-6.0 seconds to 60. 5.8 seconds officially, but in my experience if you nail the start well you're talking around 5.5 second, and then into 3rd at 65+. My 172 was nippy, but it wasn't that fast in a straight line. Above 60 then the Vee would start pulling ahead more.
Obviously chuck a corner in tho' and I can assure you I ease off more in the Vee than the 172 because you're never quite so sure
Vee isn't about that tho'
I would like to see the "around 5.5" run, standard.
Last edited:
5.5 seconds..... in a V?
ok
ok
Italian 3.2 V6
eh?
® Andy
ClioSport Club Member
Illiad V6 255
It shouldn't be a huge surprise. The Mk1 was officially 6.3 to 60, but was timed at 5.8 on tests by a couple of magazines. Mk2 has a shorter gearbox hence its official 5.8 time. Must admit my experience is based on a videoed dash and so is off the clocks which I'll admit isn't a scientific measure. The real point I'm making is that getting to 60 in a Vee in sub-6.0 seconds isn't a huge challenge. Do it too often though and your clutch won't last long ... hence why I've only done it the once in any serious way! In a battle between zero wheel spin and the engine, the clutch is the weak spot by design and unlike Clarkson we can't give it back at the end of the day!
So 5.5 is just a guess. Sub 6 seconds is a very good run.
® Andy
ClioSport Club Member
Illiad V6 255
LOL ... time code from the video is clearly exact, but clocks are the weak point, so a bit more educated than a guess. Either way I was pleased with how the Vee ran at the time, but as I said not a regular trick to try.
I've always been intrigued why the Vee gets short shrift on performance, when Mk2 is a sub-6.0s car. Not such a big deal these days, but it's hardly slow when driven well.
rps13
you appear to have failed on the avatar text update
Darren S
ClioSport Club Member
I agree. I think the reason why in many 'real world' scenarios, there seems to be little between the 1*2 and a V6 is that a 1*2 is easy to drive quickly. A V6 isn't.
As above, get a driver who knows a V6 inside-out (and it's limitations) and it would out-pace 1*2.
Not quite sure that 172 Cup could be included in that argument though.
D.
MarkCup
ClioSport Club Member
EVO mag really sums up the fun factor of what owning a Vee 255 is all about
and YES Mr Roy Munson, we all know where you stand on the V6, you must have said it about a thousand times mate, at LEAST
http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/car...v_evo_viii_fq300_v_clio_v6_v_vx220_turbo.html
I wouldn't mind all those cars in that artical at some point, but not untill this damn recession has ended lol
back on thread, even when moving the v6 will be faster than a 182, but not by that much, but then again I have almost kept up with my brothers 300bhp scoobie (in the straight line)....once moving there aint that much in cars around the same power to weight....
sti 300 has 192bhp per tonne and 350nm torque
V6 has 182bhp per ton....and 300nm of torque
182 has 165bhp per ton...and 200nm of torque
Simon
runs to take cover form the v6 haters now lol ............. have fun
and YES Mr Roy Munson, we all know where you stand on the V6, you must have said it about a thousand times mate, at LEAST
http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/car...v_evo_viii_fq300_v_clio_v6_v_vx220_turbo.html
I wouldn't mind all those cars in that artical at some point, but not untill this damn recession has ended lol
back on thread, even when moving the v6 will be faster than a 182, but not by that much, but then again I have almost kept up with my brothers 300bhp scoobie (in the straight line)....once moving there aint that much in cars around the same power to weight....
sti 300 has 192bhp per tonne and 350nm torque
V6 has 182bhp per ton....and 300nm of torque
182 has 165bhp per ton...and 200nm of torque
Simon
runs to take cover form the v6 haters now lol ............. have fun
This whole short wheel base mmmlarky I'm not believing...a quick search around on google shows that the V6 Clio wheel base isn't too far off cars like the Porsche Boxster and Lotus Elise.
The other thing people mention is the heavy and relatively high mounted V6 engine. If someone was reaaaaally keen to make a V6 handle they could dry sump the V6 engine and drop it lower in the chassis perhaps? Certainly a lot of scope for weight removal using different components/materials...exhaust/inlets manifold/rocker covers etc. etc. Orrrrr whap the V6 out and replace with a force-fed small (and there fore light) 4 cylinder engine...say 1600-2000cc...ok it flies in the face of one of the main attractions of the V6 Clio but it'd be interesting none the less.
The other thing people mention is the heavy and relatively high mounted V6 engine. If someone was reaaaaally keen to make a V6 handle they could dry sump the V6 engine and drop it lower in the chassis perhaps? Certainly a lot of scope for weight removal using different components/materials...exhaust/inlets manifold/rocker covers etc. etc. Orrrrr whap the V6 out and replace with a force-fed small (and there fore light) 4 cylinder engine...say 1600-2000cc...ok it flies in the face of one of the main attractions of the V6 Clio but it'd be interesting none the less.
Italian 3.2 V6
LOL... Tbh how? Unless iv typed figures into calculator wrong :S
(~177bhp v ~1070kg)
® Andy
ClioSport Club Member
Illiad V6 255
You mean there are V6 haters on CSruns to take cover form the v6 haters now lol ............. have fun
. I wonder what it'd take to wind them up . Who'd do something like that?
RS 172
A ANIMAL
and YES Mr Roy Munson, we all know where you stand on the V6, you must have said it about a thousand times mate, at LEAST
Oh. I'm sorry. My bad. I must have misread the title of the thread. I thought it was a discussion involving the Clio V6. Every other day someone says the Cup is a poverty spec shed, or that they hate the colour. Do you see me complaining? Another typical example of a V6 owner not grasping the fact that not everyone loves their car, and if they voice that opinion then they must be causing trouble. Get over your car and yourself TBH.
-x-
Italian 3.2 V6
A ANIMAL
Per Tone...!? Naa don't know what your on about, has always been per Ton..
Lol - thought so, must have just mis-read it!
Ali probs has enough brains to realise the thread is full of brainless people, that doesnt include people who just don't like it. Fair play but you gotta laugh at comments from people who have never seen a real one never mind driven one for any length of time!
A1*2 will beat a vee off the mark??? yeah right, as already said there is not alot in it (as a 230 owner) but at theend of the day its still the faster car in a straight line from a standing start or rolling. Corners are different as you remember what your driving and dont take as much commitment into a corner than you would in a 1*2. I have had 3 1*2's aswell btw!
BMW M4; S1000 RR
RWD and more power to weight and torque is always going to get a better start than FWD. Always.
Italian 3.2 V6
I only intended to find out which one would be quicker round, say a track. I assumed the V6 would be quicker in a straight line as it basicly has the same figures to the Alfa 147 Gta I went out for blast with with my 172 yesterday, I just didn't know what the v6 was like on corners and if once rolling on a general b-road, track and if there would b much in it. I'd always have a V6 over a 1*2, simply for renault sport heratige, extreeme looks, beautiful V6 noise etc etc even if it was slower. Didn't mean to open a can of works lol!
Round a track with the same driver (capable one) and no worries about wrecking it I would still say the vee
A Mk1 vee is 17.0 to a ton, the mk2 is 15.5 secs. Tbh on the road there isn't much in the performance of the two imo (doing normal speeds) the mk2 is heavier (by 70kg) but it has more power (30 bhp or so)
As already said, on a straight the vee will be quicker, but on bends the vee won't be imo. Obvioulsy with me having a mk1 vee, I can talk about how the mk1 handles, tbh it's 'overly bad' but imo the suspension could definately be worked on to make it handle that bit better.
If I were to buy another vee i'd deffo have a mk2 one, as tbh there is no way on earth I can get a rarer mk1 than the one I have
As already said, on a straight the vee will be quicker, but on bends the vee won't be imo. Obvioulsy with me having a mk1 vee, I can talk about how the mk1 handles, tbh it's 'overly bad' but imo the suspension could definately be worked on to make it handle that bit better.
If I were to buy another vee i'd deffo have a mk2 one, as tbh there is no way on earth I can get a rarer mk1 than the one I have
