106 GTI vs Clio 172 Discuss !
Discussion
I'm toying with the idea of a 106gti or the 172 . Which is the best bang for the $.
I hear they are both similar in performance.
I've read that the 172 breaks very easily and the driving position is a bit poor ?
I only use a car occasionally as i live in central London .
So i use it to pop to Tesco on a weekend and the odd drive up to Newcastle.
cheers
I hear they are both similar in performance.
I've read that the 172 breaks very easily and the driving position is a bit poor ?
I only use a car occasionally as i live in central London .
So i use it to pop to Tesco on a weekend and the odd drive up to Newcastle.
cheers
I've got a 182, and I've been a passenger in VTS's and 106 GTI's before as well as driving a late VTR.
Performance wise, the 172 as standard will be quicker, but not a huge amount in it on the road. The handling to me seems fairly similar the VTS is lighter however so it feels a touch more nimble. People go on about the driving position in the Clio, however i find it VERY comfortable, and much more so than the genuinely awful driving position in the Saxo / 106.
Both are good cars, and come down to personal preference.
Performance wise, the 172 as standard will be quicker, but not a huge amount in it on the road. The handling to me seems fairly similar the VTS is lighter however so it feels a touch more nimble. People go on about the driving position in the Clio, however i find it VERY comfortable, and much more so than the genuinely awful driving position in the Saxo / 106.
Both are good cars, and come down to personal preference.
I've been tempted to get a 172/182 quite a few times, usually on the baking hot days when I want aircon! However I've met a few people who sold a 106GTi to get a Clio and regretted it, even some on PGAC who "came back" and bought another.
The Clio is certainly the more modern hatch, better interior, more toys, more solid and chunky feel. It's a bit quicker on the road too. But it just doesn't feel quite as agile or alive, the steering is a bit more numb, there's vast amounts of grip (not that the 106 is really lacking in that department) and they don't feel as edgy. On track - I've not had the balls to try on the road! - in my 106 you can pretty much turn into any corner with the same amount of steering lock and use more or less throttle to set up how much it turns. The Clio is apparently less willing to play, it just grips and goes where you point it. Both are huge fun though.
I find mine OK for long journeys, it's relatively short-geared (20mph per 1000rpm in 5th) so a bit noisy but the driving position is OK for me, I've done 500 mile days in it and still been comfy.
Try both, if you can afford the extra and most mileage will be town and motorway then the Clio makes more sense. If you want outright fun and are willing to live with a fairly poor interior (barely changed since the 106 launch in 1991!) then the 106 will probably be more rewarding.
The Clio is certainly the more modern hatch, better interior, more toys, more solid and chunky feel. It's a bit quicker on the road too. But it just doesn't feel quite as agile or alive, the steering is a bit more numb, there's vast amounts of grip (not that the 106 is really lacking in that department) and they don't feel as edgy. On track - I've not had the balls to try on the road! - in my 106 you can pretty much turn into any corner with the same amount of steering lock and use more or less throttle to set up how much it turns. The Clio is apparently less willing to play, it just grips and goes where you point it. Both are huge fun though.
I find mine OK for long journeys, it's relatively short-geared (20mph per 1000rpm in 5th) so a bit noisy but the driving position is OK for me, I've done 500 mile days in it and still been comfy.
Try both, if you can afford the extra and most mileage will be town and motorway then the Clio makes more sense. If you want outright fun and are willing to live with a fairly poor interior (barely changed since the 106 launch in 1991!) then the 106 will probably be more rewarding.
neilcharlton said:
I'm toying with the idea of a 106gti or the 172 . Which is the best bang for the $.
I hear they are both similar in performance.
I've read that the 172 breaks very easily and the driving position is a bit poor ?
I only use a car occasionally as i live in central London .
So i use it to pop to Tesco on a weekend and the odd drive up to Newcastle.
cheers
No problems in 20 years of 172 ownership. If you like climate and HID lights, rain-sensing wipers and lots more standard kit then buy one. The seats are a bit high but you can do something about it if you can be bothered to remove the washers on the seat bolts.
I'd personally have the 172/182 over the GTI. Bear in mind this is on looks alone as I haven't driven either, but I find the Peugeots to have absolutely shocking dashes and pretty poor driving positions. Plus you don't really see the motoring press harping on about how the GTI is the most amazing. hatch. ever. when they talk about comparing a 182 Trophy to an M6.
Yugguy said:
No problems in 20 years of 172 ownership. If you like climate and HID lights, rain-sensing wipers and lots more standard kit then buy one. The seats are a bit high but you can do something about it if you can be bothered to remove the washers on the seat bolts.
sorry dude how have u had 20yrs of 172 ownership, they have only been around for 7ish yrs!
i got a 172 cup and when i was looking i was tempted by a 106 gti but when i drove the cup it was better, it felt quicker and i felt more able to through it into corners at higher speeds. the clio has slightly more room but not alot, especially if u are quite tall cos ur rear passengers wont have much room when the seats are pushed back!
the driving position imo isnt as bad as everyone says, i find it comfortable, the seats dont hold u as much as they could do and are very soft, which on a long drive there great but when pushing it abit u feel the need for better ones!
the 106 will have more luxuries than the cup and the full fat 172/182 has all the toys to.
at the end of the day its up to u but imo the clio 172 cup is better than the 106 gti.
W333 said:
I'd personally have the 172/182 over the GTI. Bear in mind this is on looks alone as I haven't driven either, but I find the Peugeots to have absolutely shocking dashes and pretty poor driving positions. Plus you don't really see the motoring press harping on about how the GTI is the most amazing. hatch. ever. when they talk about comparing a 182 Trophy to an M6.
The 106 was rated as the best thing since sliced bread in it's time (which I'd say peaked in about '98)
I chose to buy my Clio mainly for the security of buying new - ie someone else pays if something goes wrong in the first 3 years. That and I received a decent discount through a friend. Having said that I don't think its as much fun as my 205gti (although it is infinitely better in most other departments).
If I was buying as a toy i'd get the 106, but as I wanted a car to rely on everyday I chose the Trophy.
davo172cup said:
No problems in 20 years of 172 ownership. If you like climate and HID lights, rain-sensing wipers and lots more standard kit then buy one. The seats are a bit high but you can do something about it if you can be bothered to remove the washers on the seat bolts.
sorry dude how have u had 20yrs of 172 ownership, they have only been around for 7ish yrs!
i got a 172 cup and when i was looking i was tempted by a 106 gti but when i drove the cup it was better, it felt quicker and i felt more able to through it into corners at higher speeds. the clio has slightly more room but not alot, especially if u are quite tall cos ur rear passengers wont have much room when the seats are pushed back!
the driving position imo isnt as bad as everyone says, i find it comfortable, the seats dont hold u as much as they could do and are very soft, which on a long drive there great but when pushing it abit u feel the need for better ones!
the 106 will have more luxuries than the cup and the full fat 172/182 has all the toys to.
at the end of the day its up to u but imo the clio 172 cup is better than the 106 gti.
Typo mate, I meant two not twenty.
I pondered a Cup but in the end I wanted all the toys and I got my 172 at the end of the model run so it only cost 10995 brand new.
W333 said:
Plus you don't really see the motoring press harping on about how the GTI is the most amazing. hatch. ever. when they talk about comparing a 182 Trophy to an M6.
Motoring press in "not interested in older cars" shocker!
The 106 was still getting plenty of attention in mags like evo until it's demise in around 2002. When mags are putting together group tests and other articles, they can just ring up Renault or whoever and ask for a press car for a few days. Organising anything that isn't a current model (and hence being pushed to new buyers) involves an immense amount of hassle in comparison. Shame, because I was looking at the evo "hot hatch icons" issue from a few years back (Clio 172 vs Williams, 205GTi, mk1 Golf GTi) and it'd be great to see more of that sort of thing.
When production of the fast new Clios are in full swing, the Trophy will get mentioned in articles about new hot hatches, before being quietly forgotten as well in favour of the next big (and available) thing.
I'd go a for a 172, roomier and a little more refined. My brother has one and we did a back to back the other day. I have to say I enjoyed it but it just didn't excite me like my own car.
The 106GTI is a nice car although doesn't it have offset pedals?
The Clio does have a ladies dash too!!
The 106GTI is a nice car although doesn't it have offset pedals?
The Clio does have a ladies dash too!!
sjg said:
Motoring press in "not interested in older cars" shocker!
The 106 was still getting plenty of attention in mags like evo until it's demise in around 2002. When mags are putting together group tests and other articles, they can just ring up Renault or whoever and ask for a press car for a few days. Organising anything that isn't a current model (and hence being pushed to new buyers) involves an immense amount of hassle in comparison. Shame, because I was looking at the evo "hot hatch icons" issue from a few years back (Clio 172 vs Williams, 205GTi, mk1 Golf GTi) and it'd be great to see more of that sort of thing.
When production of the fast new Clios are in full swing, the Trophy will get mentioned in articles about new hot hatches, before being quietly forgotten as well in favour of the next big (and available) thing.
I think you're missing my point - Evo frequently go on about the 205GTi and the MkI GTi, but I have barely heard anything from them about the 106. I still think the 106 is not the one to go for as quite frankly the shape really doesn't appeal.
Whatever choice you make though, I'm sure both cars will bring a smile to your face
both good cars, overall clio is better. breathing mods on both and the performance will be very similar as the 106 is stupidly restricted with the standard exhaust/filter.
106 is more fun but clio is more refined. i went for the 106 in the end purely because i think they look better than the clio when lowered with some nice white speedlines like mine
106 is more fun but clio is more refined. i went for the 106 in the end purely because i think they look better than the clio when lowered with some nice white speedlines like mine
Evo's big hot hatch test from 2001 (afaik) put the 306 gti top, the 106 gti second, then all the other fodder below 
106 Gti is a damn fine car. The question is what else you want from the car. 306 gti is much the same out on the road, just bigger, with more comfort etc, and is more on par with the Clio 172... 106 gti is quite small!
So it depends on what you want. I'd try a 106 gti and a Clio 172, and then a 306 gti6... better than both
Dave
106 Gti is a damn fine car. The question is what else you want from the car. 306 gti is much the same out on the road, just bigger, with more comfort etc, and is more on par with the Clio 172... 106 gti is quite small!
So it depends on what you want. I'd try a 106 gti and a Clio 172, and then a 306 gti6... better than both
Dave
Mr Whippy said:
Evo's big hot hatch test from 2001 (afaik) put the 306 gti top, the 106 gti second, then all the other fodder below
Yes, it was the gti-6 1st, 106 gti 2nd, mk1 172 3rd and the saxo vts 4th in that evo hot hatch test. I must add, the vts was the quickest car of the day round anglesey
Back to the original question, the 172 is probably the better car overall as it is better equipped, bigger, quicker than the 106 but, the 106 is just as much fun, if not more. Also, i'd imagine you could pick up a 106 a fair bit cheaper than a 172 that is around the same age/mileage/condition etc, cheaper to insure, better on fuel, cheaper to maintain etc.
Yugguy said:
Typo mate, I meant two not twenty.
I pondered a Cup but in the end I wanted all the toys and I got my 172 at the end of the model run so it only cost 10995 brand new.
ok dude, did think u mite of after i posted!
the 306 gti isnt on 'par' with the 172 and definatly not the 172 cup!i have had both and i can definatly say that the 172 and the 172 cup is much better imo than the 306 gti.
the 106 gti is defo guna be cheapper to insure, run and even buy. the 172 will be more expensive but it is slightly better than the 106, its faster and it has slightly more room, if u go for the 'full fat' 172 u get alot more toys than u do in the 106. u can get a decent 172 for about 6-8k now and a low milage 172 cup for around 7k!
at that price, u cant go wrong!
yes the 306 was hot hatch of the yr in 2001 but wot about now? alot of mags have said that the 172/182 is the best hot hatch around at the mo! evo even compaired the 182 trophy to a new 6 series bmw! has that ever been done with the pugs?
>> Edited by davo172cup on Sunday 26th March 12:07
Gassing Station | French Bred | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff