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.
Has any one considered that the 172/182 has much more torque at low revs making it a MUCH more drivable car.
I had a 16v (still have it) for 18 months and ended up so pissed off at having to wait for it to come on cam before it moved. As soon as you slow down you have to drop a cog over other cars to make sure its still on the boil.
The 2.0 16v (Williams engines) are better.
I drive an MR2 Turbo now and even with turbo lag its more drivable at low revs off boost than the valver was.
Vee dub
Totally agree with what Ben said.
How the 16vs performance can be called normal is very strange - normal compared to what?
I have owned my 16v for around 5/6 months now. Coming from a 1.2 it is obviously going to feel very quick. I think the handling is out of this world. But like Yoz said, i think the 172s and Cups etc will be quicker, but the handling is a real asset to the 16v/williams.
megane coupe F7R
Quote: Originally posted by Tom16v on 08 February 2005
Nope, on me G-Tech.Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 08 February 2005
Quote: Originally posted by Tom16v on 08 February 2005
Mine was runnin low 7s to sixty from standard. Hardly normal performance!
Yep on your stop watch.
I run low 7s too on my g-tech. The best bein 7.21sec
A good 0-60 all depends on pull off. You can easily wipe half a second off with a gooden. Did a 60 time with my mate in the car and got 7.8sec
Normal as in straight line speed normal.
You lot are probably thinking about your own modded cars hence you cant believe its as slow as 24 odd secs to 100. If you took the 0-60 as 8 secs, thats leaving an incredible 60-100 time of 16 secs. Now to me, thats pretty family car average. Ford mondeo/vauxhall astra etc.
24 secs to 100 is pretty poor in relation to nowadays performance hatches hence the word normal.
All in my opinion of course so no need to get your knickers in a twist
megane coupe F7R
Quote: Originally posted by Mitchy on 08 February 2005
Normal as in straight line speed normal.
You lot are probably thinking about your own modded cars hence you cant believe its as slow as 24 odd secs to 100. If you took the 0-60 as 8 secs, thats leaving an incredible 60-100 time of 16 secs. Now to me, thats pretty family car average. Ford mondeo/vauxhall astra etc.
24 secs to 100 is pretty poor in relation to nowadays performance hatches hence the word normal.
All in my opinion of course so no need to get your knickers in a twist
Surely you know that a valver will beat most family cars! I mean todays family cars too.
therefore its not so average. especially for a 13 year old car
[Edited by Andyvalver on 08 February 2005 at 5:23pm]
Yes of course it will mate, but not so sure about mid range poke, ie 60+. Its 0-60 is still impressive, even in todays terms.
Mondeos and astras will hold on to it 60+ to top end though. As standard of course.
Back in its time, no doubt about it, it was a quick car but things have moved on.
megane coupe F7R
Agreed^^^ Fookin quick they are through third gear. Thats it though
megane coupe F7R
I know mate. Pretty much the same as a Verctra 2.5v6 and the valver keeps up with one of those to a 100.
lol a bit off topic but the clio super 1600 times and the clio wiiliams and clio maxi times are very differnt....enuf said on that matter, willy / maxi still hold alot of 2wd rally records,...
as for valvers,
correct set up with correct suspention and with correct driver should see a good match on the twisties. straigvht line its good night vienna... unless of course you drive a modded williams or 2ltr valver then its quite a simple task of dispatching a 172.. so im told...
F7 remains a very reliable and excellent engine. any renault tech will tell yo that,
only a female opinion, but ..
we have a valver, and I used to have a standard Mk1 172 (apart from Koni shocks and Apex springs) - and have driven both round Bedford - I know it isnt the most technical, or "twisty" track in the world, but in my "only female" opinion the 16v was less fun and slower.
and the valver has a magnex exhaust and spax suspension - and according to David at K-tec is quite a good valver in terms of performance ..
just an opinion ....
2005 Impreza WRX STI
how can an rsi 110bhp do 15 sec 1/4s? lol i want your secret!
they are not as slow as everyone thinks
which was my reasoning for buying it, very under-rated car
doesnt quite have the top end of the valver, but oulls to 85/90mph almost as quick as one
on the strip, its all about the launch and gearchange, that run was almost perfect, 2nd to 3rd could have been a little quicker, so its possible to shave a little off that time, maybe only 0.1s
there isnt really much skill involved in 1/4 mile racing sadly
just get the launch right and youre on your way
ExigeV6|Q5|DS3|Fiat
LOL
Here we go again! I see Mitchy is stirring up a nice little pot here!
Being a serious 16v geek having owned one for over 5 years and now having a 172 cup i think i can comment reliabliy on this subject......
People who knew my valver, knew it was a quick one. Standard with only a decat. 1/4 mile 15.6 @ 89mph at Santa Pod. 0-60 was 7.3s timed professionaly (see pic). 0-100 in just under 19seconds.
Now i have the cup...is it quicker?.....quite simply YES. Where is it quicker i hear you ask? Everywhere! All through the rev range it pulls like a train.
So much quicker than the valver in a straight line and coming out of the corners it would have left my valver.
More fun? Well sort of.....actually if im honest the valver was more fun in terms of go-cart handling but overall im happier with the Cup being a new car.
Dont be fooled by these figures that are being stated about, a good 13 year old valver would still be a fair match for a 172 round a tight twisty track such as Brands, but on the straight we all know that the 172 would do.....and the cup and 182 would and is defo quicker full stop.
Peace out
http://members.lycos.co.uk/aaronchap/7.37.jpg
megane coupe F7R
well said ^^^^
Clio 182
Quote: Originally posted by Lunner on 08 February 2005
Quote: Originally posted by Dan_mk1 on 07 February 2005Mines 150bhp, runs 15.5 1/4 mile.[/QUOTE]LOLMy RSi is dead on 110bhp and runs a quarter mile in 15.8....figures curtosy of Bambam
Full throttle gear changes? lol, that time seems bloody low considering mine is generally one of the quicker 16vs down the 1/4.
Quote: Originally posted by JayR on 08 February 2005Quote: Originally posted by Bryan on 08 February 2005they are not as slow as everyone thinks
doesnt quite have the top end of the valver, but oulls to 85/90mph almost as quick as one
Totally agree with this!!!A mate has what i think is a really quick mk2 1.6 Rsi (just a ramcharger under the bonnet) and from standing he does keep tack on me pretty well until 75mph which is where il start to pull (3rd gears my favorite
)!!!if a mrk 2 1.6rsi is keeping up with you, your doing summit very wrong, they are SLOW lol.
my car 1.7 turbo put out the same torque as a 172 on saterday, and the 172 went on first, but i was 20bhp lower than him, and that was at 10psi, boost has now gone up and the vacume circuit has been changed, i have a new inlet manifold coming to put injection back on the engine, and also looking at a omex ecu and getting it mapped and also a new turbo is in the pipeline too lol
LY 200
Lol it maybe summin to do with the 17s perhaps but still i wouldnt say this ones slow at all!!!Quote: Originally posted by MaLicE on 08 February 2005
Quote: Originally posted by JayR on 08 February 2005
Totally agree with this!!!
A mate has what i think is a really quick mk2 1.6 Rsi (just a ramcharger under the bonnet) and from standing he does keep tack on me pretty well until 75mph which is where il start to pull (3rd gears my favorite
if a mrk 2 1.6rsi is keeping up with you, your doing summit very wrong, they are SLOW lol.
my car 1.7 turbo put out the same torque as a 172 on saterday, and the 172 went on first, but i was 20bhp lower than him, and that was at 10psi, boost has now gone up and the vacume circuit has been changed, i have a new inlet manifold coming to put injection back on the engine, and also looking at a omex ecu and getting it mapped and also a new turbo is in the pipeline too lol
I dont know how a car on standard 13" alloy with just 27bhp less standard would be killed by a valver with 17s to 60 anyway, like i said when i come into 3rd thats when the difference is noticed more!!!
I dont know how that could be so hard to believe when people are sayin there 140 bhp Valvers are doing alrite against 170 bhp 172s......If im doing the math right i make that a bigger gap!!!
You should be able to leave Mk2 RSi easily! They only way we stay with 172s (Or Dont as some beleive) is because of the weight advantage. A RSi has less bhp/torque and weighs more! The power to weight difference is BIG!Quote: Originally posted by JayR on 09 February 2005
Lol it maybe summin to do with the 17s perhaps but still i wouldnt say this ones slow at all!!!Quote: Originally posted by MaLicE on 08 February 2005
Quote: Originally posted by JayR on 08 February 2005
Totally agree with this!!!
A mate has what i think is a really quick mk2 1.6 Rsi (just a ramcharger under the bonnet) and from standing he does keep tack on me pretty well until 75mph which is where il start to pull (3rd gears my favorite
if a mrk 2 1.6rsi is keeping up with you, your doing summit very wrong, they are SLOW lol.
my car 1.7 turbo put out the same torque as a 172 on saterday, and the 172 went on first, but i was 20bhp lower than him, and that was at 10psi, boost has now gone up and the vacume circuit has been changed, i have a new inlet manifold coming to put injection back on the engine, and also looking at a omex ecu and getting it mapped and also a new turbo is in the pipeline too lol
I dont know how a car on standard 13" alloy with just 27bhp less standard would be killed by a valver with 17s to 60 anyway, like i said when i come into 3rd thats when the difference is noticed more!!!
I dont know how that could be so hard to believe when people are sayin there 140 bhp Valvers are doing alrite against 170 bhp 172s......If im doing the math right i make that a bigger gap!!!
Mk1 RSis however should stay with you till 60/70/80. My mates didnt stand a chance against my valver but that was modded vs standard Rsi. Standard Vs Standard its not until the high end of third youll start to pull a gap.
LY 200
Tbh mate i feel any torque the valver had is lost when 17s are put on, i have a huge problem puliing of the 1st gear change as i hate hittling the limiter so when the wheels are spinning and it looks like its hitting 7k (but its not really) il automatically change (il never hit the red ever which could be another fault of mine) but i will say i dont find this mk2 Rsi slow anyway (well to 60/70mph anyway)!!!Quote: Originally posted by Tom20v on 10 February 2005
You should be able to leave Mk2 RSi easily! They only way we stay with 172s (Or Dont as some beleive) is because of the weight advantage. A RSi has less bhp/torque and weighs more! The power to weight difference is BIG!Quote: Originally posted by JayR on 09 February 2005
Lol it maybe summin to do with the 17s perhaps but still i wouldnt say this ones slow at all!!!Quote: Originally posted by MaLicE on 08 February 2005
Quote: Originally posted by JayR on 08 February 2005
Totally agree with this!!!
A mate has what i think is a really quick mk2 1.6 Rsi (just a ramcharger under the bonnet) and from standing he does keep tack on me pretty well until 75mph which is where il start to pull (3rd gears my favorite
if a mrk 2 1.6rsi is keeping up with you, your doing summit very wrong, they are SLOW lol.
my car 1.7 turbo put out the same torque as a 172 on saterday, and the 172 went on first, but i was 20bhp lower than him, and that was at 10psi, boost has now gone up and the vacume circuit has been changed, i have a new inlet manifold coming to put injection back on the engine, and also looking at a omex ecu and getting it mapped and also a new turbo is in the pipeline too lol
I dont know how a car on standard 13" alloy with just 27bhp less standard would be killed by a valver with 17s to 60 anyway, like i said when i come into 3rd thats when the difference is noticed more!!!
I dont know how that could be so hard to believe when people are sayin there 140 bhp Valvers are doing alrite against 170 bhp 172s......If im doing the math right i make that a bigger gap!!!
Mk1 RSis however should stay with you till 60/70/80. My mates didnt stand a chance against my valver but that was modded vs standard Rsi. Standard Vs Standard its not until the high end of third youll start to pull a gap.
Hmm i had 17s on my valver and never had any probs. As i said even on 17s mine would leave my mates mk1 RSi no probs.Quote: Originally posted by JayR on 10 February 2005
Tbh mate i feel any torque the valver had is lost when 17s are put on, i have a huge problem puliing of the 1st gear change as i hate hittling the limiter so when the wheels are spinning and it looks like its hitting 7k (but its not really) il automatically change (il never hit the red ever which could be another fault of mine) but i will say i dont find this mk2 Rsi slow anyway (well to 60/70mph anyway)!!!Quote: Originally posted by Tom20v on 10 February 2005
You should be able to leave Mk2 RSi easily! They only way we stay with 172s (Or Dont as some beleive) is because of the weight advantage. A RSi has less bhp/torque and weighs more! The power to weight difference is BIG!Quote: Originally posted by JayR on 09 February 2005
Lol it maybe summin to do with the 17s perhaps but still i wouldnt say this ones slow at all!!!Quote: Originally posted by MaLicE on 08 February 2005
Quote: Originally posted by JayR on 08 February 2005
Totally agree with this!!!
A mate has what i think is a really quick mk2 1.6 Rsi (just a ramcharger under the bonnet) and from standing he does keep tack on me pretty well until 75mph which is where il start to pull (3rd gears my favorite
if a mrk 2 1.6rsi is keeping up with you, your doing summit very wrong, they are SLOW lol.
my car 1.7 turbo put out the same torque as a 172 on saterday, and the 172 went on first, but i was 20bhp lower than him, and that was at 10psi, boost has now gone up and the vacume circuit has been changed, i have a new inlet manifold coming to put injection back on the engine, and also looking at a omex ecu and getting it mapped and also a new turbo is in the pipeline too lol
I dont know how a car on standard 13" alloy with just 27bhp less standard would be killed by a valver with 17s to 60 anyway, like i said when i come into 3rd thats when the difference is noticed more!!!
I dont know how that could be so hard to believe when people are sayin there 140 bhp Valvers are doing alrite against 170 bhp 172s......If im doing the math right i make that a bigger gap!!!
Mk1 RSis however should stay with you till 60/70/80. My mates didnt stand a chance against my valver but that was modded vs standard Rsi. Standard Vs Standard its not until the high end of third youll start to pull a gap.
Sounds like you valver needs a service or something.
