Would you go from a 200 back to a 1*2?

[DUBS73P]

As it says really...

Had a 182FF with cup packs and loved it but fancied the new shape, so bought the 200 with cup pack, it's just not doing it for me, I'm not even sure what it is, just doesn't sparkle like the 182 and definitely doesn't seem worth keeping all that money tied up in a car I have no heart in

I've also been looking at the R26 which I've always loved, insurance would be 1100 but worried it'll be the same story as the 200

And both Civics but you pay a lot more for less than what I had in my 182

So what would you do?

 

[cs_dave]

Get a 182?

 

[MKRS]

Get a phase 1 172...?

 

[Mr R.]

Mint PH1.

 

[BoatNonce]

Ed.200 is considering doing this very thing. However he is also looking for boost.

 

[Jamie]

Sell it, but try something else. Maybe looking back with rose tinted glasses.

 

[Ph1 Tom]

Mk1 Focus RS

 

[Martin_172]

I done it, well I went Clio 172, Clio 200, Twingo GT, Clio 172

I love the 200 and would have kept it if mine wasn't a nail, I considered getting another as I wanted to love the car and loved the way it drove when it was working, just mine was a heap.

personally I found the 200 was a better car, it wasn't any slower, handled better, had so much grip, built better (most of it!), better gearbox, the list goes on. Only negatives was the fuel consumption and stereo compaired to the 172 for me.

HOWEVER, my 200 cost me £15,000 and my 172 cost me £1000.....

 

[JCC]

Personally, no, not if I could avoid it. Everyone's different though.

TBH if I can avoid it I'm never going back to NA again.

 

[vRS LIL]

Ph1 for obvious reasons! I'd love an R26 next

 

[DUBS73P]

I done it, well I went Clio 172, Clio 200, Twingo GT, Clio 172

I love the 200 and would have kept it if mine wasn't a nail, I considered getting another as I wanted to love the car and loved the way it drove when it was working, just mine was a heap.

personally I found the 200 was a better car, it wasn't any slower, handled better, had so much grip, built better (most of it!), better gearbox, the list goes on. Only negatives was the fuel consumption and stereo compaired to the 172 for me.

HOWEVER, my 200 cost me £15,000 and my 172 cost me £1000.....

I agree completely about the 200, it is a better car, especially the grip, like you say, but the gearbox is just a mess, I just don't think the grip and build is worth the extra ~5/6k

Especially when an r26 costs the same now, and a good 182 is under 3k

 

[Inequality Street]

How much of a loss would you be taking on the 200 if you sold it though?

 

[Martin_172]

I agree completely about the 200, it is a better car, especially the grip, like you say, but the gearbox is just a mess, I just don't think the grip and build is worth the extra ~5/6k

Especially when an r26 costs the same now, and a good 182 is under 3k

you not get on with the gearbox? I loved it, loved it even more in my DCI106!

id also consider a fiesta ST150, ive never really given them a thought until I had a shot in one a few weeks ago and kinda wish I had gone for one of them for a change instead of another 172!, ok so performance wise as standard they are slower than the clio but I hear they respond well to a few mods so if you don't mind modifying then its probably a nice base to start!

 

[DB.]

Personally, no, not if I could avoid it. Everyone's different though.

TBH if I can avoid it I'm never going back to NA again.

​This, plus it's now at least an 8 year old car and I prefer more modern cars!

 

[Xanda73]

I've just chopped my very nice, low miles ph1 for a '08 R26.

To answer your question, yes I'd go back. I should of bought a 182 Trophy

 

[DB.]

I've just chopped my very nice, low miles ph1 for a '08 R26.

To answer your question, yes I'd go back. I should of bought a 182 Trophy

Crazy! Strange how minds can differ so greatly

 

[Adamm.]

DC5 Integra?

R26 is a good shout too.

 

[Xanda73]

Crazy! Strange how minds can differ so greatly

On balance, for me, the R26 is just not as good as the 172. 19mpg on a thrash vs 38 - it really ain't worth that. Seats are nice though.

 

[Munson]

38mpg thrashing a 172?

 

[Adamm.]

38mpg thrashing a 172?

Lol I thought that, mines about 25mpg on a thrash. Although seen a few people on here quoting better MPG than what I get.

 

[DB.]

My old 182 used to be about 28mpg on day to day city driving, not 38mpg on a thrash lol!

 

[Xanda73]

Clio would do 45mpg on a long run, 300 miles/5 hours. Not had a 182 so don't know how they compare to a ph1, but the Megane is truly awful for the slight performance increase.

 

[Munson]

Lol I thought that, mines about 25mpg on a thrash. Although seen a few people on here quoting better MPG than what I get.

My 182 did around 27 over its lifetime. People on here quoting 40+ are following lorries downhill at 55mph for ten hours.

 

[Xanda73]

Again, on a 182 I don't know, but my ph1, run on high octane fuel would return 45mpg at 80 easily. Driven 'properly' on my work commute (3 miles town at 30ish, 15 miles A&B roads at a lot faster) it would return 38-40. The R26 on the same journey driven as carefully as possible only gets to 28/29. Driven the same as the Clio, I'm struggling to get to 20mpg.

 

[Harpham]

I went from a 200 back down to a Ph1 172. Definitely worth the change.

 

[Matt W]

I don't think I would, had enough of fixing/replacing parts every weekend when I had a 172.

The 200 is much more civilised and even works in the rain.

 

[Munson]

Again, on a 182 I don't know, but my ph1, run on high octane fuel would return 45mpg at 80 easily. Driven 'properly' on my work commute (3 miles town at 30ish, 15 miles A&B roads at a lot faster) it would return 38-40. The R26 on the same journey driven as carefully as possible only gets to 28/29. Driven the same as the Clio, I'm struggling to get to 20mpg.

So driven in the same manner, the Clio goes twice as far per gallon of petrol as the Megane?

 

[gez 172]

I don't think I would, had enough of fixing/replacing parts every weekend when I had a 172.

The 200 is much more civilised and even works in the rain.

Couldn't agree more. It's nice not taking an engine/box out every weekend and not having the confidence to take the car abroad or anything. My ph1 was fun, lots of fun. But the 200 is more fun again, better built, better looking and probably costs the same by the time you've finished buying parts to replace on the old cars

 

[R-Sport.]

I go from a 200 to 197, back to 182 & across to my ph1 weekly, sometimes daily.


When I get a 200 instock, I drive it- obviously to test it, however its more refined, more grown up & certainly in terms of a bit of personal appearance Id rather drive a new car. Especially any nights out that involve friends etc.

The 200 is a long way better than the 197, the most noticeable thing is the low down torque & driving experience is sharper. As well as most 197 's are beginning to suffer from age related gremlins like Binding Brakes, Gearbox & all sorts of steering & suspension issues.
The 200 is fun, especially on fast twisty roads- but theres something missing, the ability to make progress quickly in a straight line, especially if you land In a gear slightly low down the revs.

What I think happens to 200 owners, is they get bored of its slow straight line speed & weak ability to tune it without spending £££, & of course the mediocre MPG that's sees you at the fuel pump on a daily basis.-
Hence if your coming from an older 182- especially one that's been looked after you begin to wonder why you spent 10-11k on a car that value for money wise isn't much better than the 3/4k car you came from in the first place.

I see so many 197/200/R26 owners going back to 182's ( some financial / some for excitement reasons ) & are over the moon with what they get.

I think having sampled the range a hundred times over then depending on whether your choice is out & out speed or a little luxury is involved then really I fully understand why going back to a 182 makes sense.

I bought a phase 1 but maybe just maybe after spending a lot of money on it to mint it I should have stayed with one of my 182's that I had- the LY 182 on 40k in Mint condition ( with Recaros ) would have been a keeper- or the other BG with Recaros was great as well.

However my Phase 1 is there now its so much more fun than a 182- it all boils down to budget.

The problem is - is finding a decent 182 to buy- theres so much CRAP out there I think now theres 1 good one for every 30 crap ones.


So would I go from a 200 to a 182, yes 100% -

More fun, more thrills, lower maintenaince- however budget 4k for a VERY good one- or at least 4k for one that's going to drive like a proper 182, not a 2k one with firestone tyres & no service history.
That also goes for a phase 1- you could potentially spend more on a PH1 to get it to great standard than a 182, even coming from a modest 1500 price tag- 2-3k is easily spent.-

Regards

S

 

[Gaz_]

Come on, binding brakes steering and gearbox issues are a mk3 RS problem in general, not a 197 age thing. I'd put good money on more 200 boxes being replaced than 197 ones........

 

[R-Sport.]

the overall problem list on 197s is more extensive on the 197 V the 200's - however a large %age of that is going to be down to age, nothing else-

When the 200 gets to 50k Im sure the list will be the same-

PS im not quite sure where you get the assumption of more 200 boxes- just based on an average of 1 in 3 boxes changed on these cars then the sales numbers would be a lot more than the 200's





S

 

[Gaz_]

Mk3's can feel flat after coming from a decent mk2, there's no getting away from it. Over the last few days since watching that Evo vid, even I've been dabbling with chopping mine in for a trophy....... My 197 only gets used at weekends.... I was thinking of getting rid of mine and the mrs fiesta zs, get a 1 series for the mrs and day to day stuff, and me end up with a T. However, i know I will miss the (slightly) better image/ build of the 197. The mk2 can feel pretty gruff in comparison.

 

[Lal B3N]

I would like to try a top spec 197/200 but I'd be scared of getting one with a poor engine.

A friend had a 200 and it just didn't feel quick and my 182 had no issues pulling away from it, but mine seems to be a bit of a freak which is what puts me off getting a newer clio.

 

[Xanda73]

So driven in the same manner, the Clio goes twice as far per gallon of petrol as the Megane?

So far, in my experience, yes. The Megane will be going a little faster however, but will be less entertaining. I used to thrash my Clio to work and back every day (work shifts so on the roads at odd times) and it cost me roughly £30/week. Driving the R26 almost as steady as possible and it's costing me £45ish. The thing is, the Megane doesn't goad you into thrashing it anywhere near like the Clio did, but still the economy is terrible.

To put what can only be described as the ph1's brilliance into context further - today I've had a loan 62 plate Twingo, the base spec 60 bhp I think. Thrashed to work and back it did 43.5mpg (on cheap fuel). The 172 would of done better than that without being thrashed but actually going faster.

To answer again the PO's question, yes IMHO a well looked after ph1 172 is a viable return from a 200 overall.

 

[DrR]

Oh god, this has morphed into another MPG thread....

 

[Renault Wolverhampton]

with the 182 i think the excitment of driving it.the 200 i had for a week seemed to do all the things my 182 did but not as involving to drive unless you were really really pushing it hard.the r26/225 arguement can go all day tbqh,but i would never ever go back to one.its all personal preference some people like newer cars some people like comfort some people want cheap.which ever suits you there's an r.s for everyone

 

[Lal B3N]

Oh god, this has morphed into another MPG thread....

I'm sure some people pluck the figures out of the air though....

 

[Sir_Dave]

I found the 197 Cup to excellent when i was properly on it, the gearbox/brakes making up for the electric steering & lack of low down pull.

Needless to say, when hooning the car was pretty much in its element, & well, when the revs are constantly above 5k, you dont really notice the huge flat spot at 3k ... brakes are epic, steering weights up well enough and the daft exhaust rasps, pops, bangs and burbles like a good 'un. The gearbox is fantastic - quick fire like a CTR, great ratios for keeping it on the boil like a Gti6, to be blunt, its in a different league to the 'thing' in the 1*2 lol. Have sussed heel & toe as well now, wider shoes + a harder stab of the throttle = sorted. Keep it above 5k rpm and it really does cover ground pretty well, zinging its way to the limiter time and time again, all the while, not sounding like its about to rattle to death like my other miley shed

In normal day to day driving, it did my head in & lasted for 3 weeks.

 

[Martin_172]

never driven a 197 but I found the low down pull on my 200 better than my 172's but obviously that was one of the 200s stronger points with the different cylinder head and gearbox ratios

 

[MarkCup]

No. Never.