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.
Disagree, i came up against many type r's in my FF182 and in a straight line there was no difference, one of them was my mates, and i would think it would have killed it around the twisties, and if it didnt my Trophy deffo would..:rasp:
S2000
Clios murder Civics. End of. Hang on.... uuummm this is a Clio forum.
Both good cars though.
Both good cars though.
C63 PP,R1,,Clubman
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5-KJ2hvQtJ4 oooo such a glorious sound
106 GTi
TYpe R has a lovely gearbox and ideal positioned stick - needs it as you have to use the fucker so much. Steering is crap, overly light and you never know what the front wheels or doing. I don't really care which is faster, I hated the way it drove so much when I was choosing a few years ago I will take the 182 ta.
DC2 or DC5 however different matter.
DC2 or DC5 however different matter.
Poopensharten
ClioSport Club Member
Golf R
Well as an all rounder id say the CTR is a better car, build quality for a start they dont rattle or squeak and will more than likley run off the clock and back again before itll break.
Performance is antother whilst the pre-facelift versions (before 2004) the CTR strikes 60 in 6.6 whilst those after do it in 6.4, the only thing is because the VTEC kicks in at 5400rpm you really have to get the shoe down in every gear to get the most out of it, whilst doing this i reckon your unlikley to see above 25mpg. Its a high revving engine so you cant expect to get good fuel consumption from it!
I dont think its a fair comparrison the CTR is more on a par with the Megane Sports IMO.
If i was gonna compare somthing id compare the Ek9 and the 182.
Performance is antother whilst the pre-facelift versions (before 2004) the CTR strikes 60 in 6.6 whilst those after do it in 6.4, the only thing is because the VTEC kicks in at 5400rpm you really have to get the shoe down in every gear to get the most out of it, whilst doing this i reckon your unlikley to see above 25mpg. Its a high revving engine so you cant expect to get good fuel consumption from it!
I dont think its a fair comparrison the CTR is more on a par with the Megane Sports IMO.
If i was gonna compare somthing id compare the Ek9 and the 182.
Golf 7R
Have driven both and the CTR is faster.. well after about 90ish anyhow. The gearbox is sublime, the seats are fantastic vtec is addictive,couple that with the fact that is has bulletproof reliability and what seems like better manufacturer aftercare and servicing, overall id say CTR is the better car. IMO
the steering on CTRs is so dead that IMO any car entuthiast SHOULD have been put so far off by it that they couldnt bring themselves to buy an otherwise good car.
Does it really matter? It's down to tenths of a second to 60, and it's not until license losing speeds that the CTR starts to have an advantage... The Japanese make very well engineered cars that are fantastic on smooth roads, and the french make characterful little blasters that love nothing more than a bumpy b-road. It's the way it's always been, but it seems that the Japanese manufacturers are sort of losing the plot a bit at the moment. Where are you seriously going to be able to have a decent thrash in your shiney new GT-R other than a track? I have trouble finding roads that I can use my Sport on to it's full extent, nevermind another 300ish bhp. At least things like the Megane Sport can be used real world.
Horses for courses.
Horses for courses.
Renault Clio 172 Ph2
I've owned both - in this order, 182, ctr, 172 ph1, 197 and now another 172.
I would have brought another CTR if I prefered the civic. They are good cars, no doubt, I would almost 100% say from my experience definately felt a bit quicker for straight line pace, but I have always preffered the cornering and driving experience of the clio expecially on bumpy country lanes (where I live), I just think its got more character and is more lively.
I would have brought another CTR if I prefered the civic. They are good cars, no doubt, I would almost 100% say from my experience definately felt a bit quicker for straight line pace, but I have always preffered the cornering and driving experience of the clio expecially on bumpy country lanes (where I live), I just think its got more character and is more lively.
Poopensharten
ClioSport Club Member
Golf R
I suppose its down to personal taste!
Poopensharten
ClioSport Club Member
Golf R
If i had the money at the time i think id have bought the type r, but funds permitting i had to buy the 172, although im not dissapointed!
Mk1 Eunos Roadster
IMO standard vs standard the Clio is quicker above 50. It's a close thing below that, but 3rd and 4th gears from 5.0 to 10.0+ in the 182 sees off a standard Civic Type R every time. Wouldn't have minded the Civic's BQ and seats though.
