Would I be 'happy' with a 182 cup?

[Daz.]

TBF I think the visual front end difference is the splitter. It does actually quite drastically improve the look, and IIRC it wasn't an OE option on the 172, so perhaps that's where the perception comes from?

Every 172 I see these days seems to have a cup splitter - once upon a time there wasn't that many!

 

[Munson]

Every 172 I see these days seems to have a cup splitter - once upon a time there wasn't that many!

I'm sure you're right, but if someone is looking at press photos on Google and what not when thinking about a purchase, it's easy to see why they may feel the 172 looks worse at the front.

 

[craigp172cup]

I was after a FF182 with cup packs a couple of months ago, but the best example I saw was a 182 cup in racing blue. So I bought that.

I dont understand peoples comments on here about 182 cups being half arsed or whatever, they were a good £1k or so cheaper than a full spec 182 with leather when they were new, so made it a cheaper way to get the car without the bits some people didnt put too much importance on.

The seats are exactly the same, but cloth in the the Cup, half leather in the normal or FF182.

Cup still has ABS, traction, A/C, cruise, so no significant great loss if you can buy the car cheaper.

I was the same. Initially set out for a ff 182 with cup pack in RB. Best example i could find though was a 182 cup in RB, so i went for that. Havent regreted it.

 

[realnumber 1]

Every 172 I see these days seems to have a Skoda splitter - once upon a time there wasn't that many!

Pmsl at 172's looking older than 182's

 

[alanc1000]

Go for the full fat, that way people won't think you are poor.

 

[Munson]

Pmsl at 172's looking older than 182's

They do look older though. Standard for standard. Not all cars are modified and tweaked to fit into the CS scene. CS is probably a small percentage of total Clio owners. Put a standard 172 next to a standard 182 with Cup packs, and the 172 looks a bit more dated. No?

 

[JMR]

Go for the full fat, that way people won't think you are poor.

Cos people think I'm loaded driving a Clio.

I saw a "poor" man the other day, I thought your poor fcuker just driving an M3.
Should have got the M3 CSL its got a carbon roof, not the poor mans steel roof.

Roy Munson & Brown Bear, you have it right fellas :approve: - the 182 Cup was never meant to be a stripped out road going race car was it?
Just a cheaper version.

Whoever says they are pointless are mindless children.:rasp:

 

[realnumber 1]

They do look older though. Standard for standard. Not all cars are modified and tweaked to fit into the CS scene. CS is probably a small percentage of total Clio owners. Put a standard 172 next to a standard 182 with Cup packs, and the 172 looks a bit more dated. No?

No it just looks like a very slightly different version of the same car. Not older!

 

[Gandi69]

Go for either if you ask me, i dont think you'll be disappointed as theres FA in it. I personally think the 182 range of colours isn't all that great, would have been nice if they'd done a metallic green.

 

[_williams_]

A Cup is supposed to be a stripped out road going race car? A road going race car? WTF?

admittedly i orded it a bit wrong but is the 172 cup not supposed to be a more track based car? does it not come up in EVERY "what track car do i buy" thread?!

Are you actually blind?

You do know all the part numbers for the entire front end are the same for both the 172 & 182's??

Infact I can't think of anything exterior wise on a mk2 shell bar the rear bumper and the grey/black headlight inserts that are NOT exactly the same!

Oh the aerial base if it's got a cup spoiler - must be this that makes them look so different!

are they not on the front end?! bit contradictory there!

 

[_williams_]

looks like this thread is upsetting the 172 faithful, fact of the matter is the 172 looks dated, thats not to say its not a lovely car but those small touches that were updated on the 182 do make a great deal of difference!

 

[Revels]

looks like this thread is upsetting the 172 faithful, fact of the matter is the 172 looks dated, thats not to say its not a lovely car but those small touches that were updated on the 182 do make a great deal of difference!

You mean the chav exhausts and worse wheels?

 

[DanFreemanPhoto]

The 172 looks dated?! I assume you mean the phase 1. The 172 cup doesn't look dated at all, its the same as a 182 with no twin exhausts!

 

[realnumber 1]

Lol at a splitter and a 10mm drop making a 182 look newer than a 172 on the front

 

[_williams_]

looks like this thread is upsetting the 172 faithful, fact of the matter is the 172 looks dated, thats not to say its not a lovely car but those small touches that were updated on the 182 do make a great deal of difference!

The 172 looks dated?! I assume you mean the phase 1. The 172 cup doesn't look dated at all, its the same as a 182 with no twin exhausts!

i didn't say the 172 cup, i said the 172!!!

i give up !!

place is full of idiots!! :banghead:

 

[Munson]

No it just looks like a very slightly different version of the same car. Not older!

I disagree. It looks older to me, therefore I can see why others might also think it looks older. Point of that particular discussion TBH.

 

[Revels]

I disagree. It looks older to me, therefore I can see why others might also think it looks older. Point of that particular discussion TBH.

Silver 172 vs silver 182. Even including the rear view, most people (i.e. non Clio geeks) won't know which is newer.

 

[Munson]

admittedly i orded it a bit wrong but is the 172 cup not supposed to be a more track based car? does it not come up in EVERY "what track car do i buy" thread?!

Renault are in the business of making road cars. The 172Cup is a road car. Yes it's an ideal basis for some cheap track fun, but then so is the FF182. By EVERY thread, you mean on a Clio forum where most people think a TOW sticker is the pinnacle of cool? Not having a go or anything. I'm sure they're awesome, but they're not really anymore of a track car than any other Clio. They're just marketed as such. Certainly there's little point in using a FF182 and taking everything out, when you can use a 172Cup that already had nothing. Ultimately I'd never own one because I like AC. I even keep it on around track, because I don't like sweating.

 

[ForceIndia]

I have no idea how anyone could say (without prior knowledge) that one looks older than the other.

 

[Munson]

Silver 172 vs silver 182. Even including the rear view, most people (i.e. non Clio geeks) won't know which is newer.

Yes, but some people may think it looks older/different. People are trying to say they look identical, and then when they're proven wrong, the old 'most people' argument comes out. Maybe the guy who thought they looked different/older isn't most people. Point proven much.

 

[Revels]

Yes, but some people may think it looks older/different. People are trying to say they look identical, and then when they're proven wrong, the old 'most people' argument comes out. Maybe the guy who thought they looked different/older isn't most people. Point proven much.

Yes, but I may think from first glance that you're 21. Most people won't. Does that mean in some lights you don't look 21?

It's an opinion. Some people might think the Ph1 looks newer than the Ph2. Ph2 newer than Ph3.

A Ph2 looks dated next to a 200. But to say the same of the 172 > 182 is bananas. B AN AN AS!

 

[jack_kemp]

Was it not actually proven that the 200Cup is the most pointless Renualtsport Clio ever? It's like 1kg lighter or something, and the dash is made from hard plastic. Somehow though, it's the CS hero's choice while the 182Cup is the worst car ever made. Morons indeed. Post a pic up of an orange tow eye (or something equally as pointless), and it'll be the coolest 'race car mod' ever.

200 cup is 36kg lighter. Makes FA difference.
Just eat a smaller breakfast.

Dont know about weight saving on the 182 cup? But I'm pretty sure it's equally as pointless.

FF with cup packs wins on the 200.

 

[Munson]

Yes, but I may think from first glance that you're 21. Most people won't. Does that mean in some lights you don't look 21?

It's an opinion. Some people might think the Ph1 looks newer than the Ph2. Ph2 newer than Ph3.

A Ph2 looks dated next to a 200. But to say the same of the 172 > 182 is bananas. B AN AN AS!

Yes but HE thinks they look dated. The reactions are personal, and do not change the fact that the they DO look different. Therefore, whether or not his/my opinion is skewed by knowing the 172 is older, is of minor importance to him/me. Unless people buy cars based on what other people think (which in fairness they do, granted) then I personally don't see what difference it makes what 'most people' think. It's his personal choice.

 

[MrTurner]

haha - 172's are ghey..

Back to the OP's original question - No you won't.

 

[Brett]

The only comment I'll make on this thread is that ph1's look better than ph2's (172 or 182)

Close thread.

 

[rexe]

Im going to giggle at the whole thread in general... pmsl

Stu get yourself a 182 with as much s**te you can and be done with it you big pansy... you know exaclty what you want now go and buy the thing

With love and kisses...

 

[slindborg]

Good ole rexyweexy

Are the normal clio lights hugely different to the xenons? I do a LOT of country lane miles and having had candles in a box as lights from the homo plastic skip, I want as good as possible.
Are the std normal lights projector lenses etc so the can take a pikey ebay HID.

 

[Gaz_]

I'd have a 182 Cup no problem!

The Clio Xenons are massively overrated, look pretty, but the pattern scatters all over the place. I've had a 172 Cup, a 182 Cupped (with xenons)

The H7 Halogens are fine imo, bang in some Osram night breakers and you're away

 

[Munson]

182 xenons are poor. The light beam is ok as long as you don't want to see more that 50 yards ahead. The Cup lamps with uprated bulbs offer far better vision. Although vision is not important. You need BLUE bulbs motherf**ker!

 

[slindborg]

hmmmmm I drove a cup the other week. While the seats looked pants, they didnt feel much different.

I like seeing in the dark. Damn.
Oh well, whatever comes up first with the offers I'm willing to make wins

 

[JMR]

hmmmmm I drove a cup the other week. While the seats looked pants, they didnt feel much different.

They are exactly the same seats underneath, one has cloth on top, other has leather/alcantara.