Complete common sense.
However, when it comes to cars, such things never apply.
@Cub. has the best front-dragging Clio I've had the privilege to be in but his power came from a dustbin full of £50 notes and a supercharger.
All because he wanted a fast Clio, even though less money would have got him into an Elise or other such "better" cars
Not strictly true. I wanted a fun track day toy which;
a) Is reasonably cheap to repair and run on track (15 inch tyres, cheap brake pads etc). I had a 911 C4S before the clio, and took it on track twice and discovered there was no way I could fund tracking it as much as I wanted to. So it got sold, and a track project and a daily became the norm for me.
b) I can fit in, and drive to and from tracks in the UK and abroad which don't make me weep into my cornflakes and visit a Spine surgeon. That ruled out MX5's and Elises etc.
c) There is a debate as to what a "better" car is depending on its use. Power to weight in a boosted clio is on a par with an Audi R8 4.2, a 991 Targa 4S and a BMW E46 M3 GTR. I am pretty certain I can't buy any of those for the same price the work on my clio has cost.
The long and short of it OP, is to get high power from an NA clio, you are talking more expense and I would only recommend it if you are committed to keeping the car for a reasonably long period of time and seeing use from the expense. I would also advocate going boosted over NA for outright power. The cost to power gain ratio is greater, so offers better value for money IMO. If you like NA because of the "feel" then go ahead, but it is alot of money to spend to get less power.
You invariably need a diff to use the power on track, so that is more expense. Then you'll want to tighten up the handling. More expense. The list can go on.
