RE: Blood Brothers: Twingo 133 vs Clio 182

[s m]

Penneth said:

s m said:

Impressive if they are accurately timed in the same manner as Autocar tests- they only managed a half second quicker for the Clio 197

I think it has something to do with the change between 2nd and 3rd. Once I'd put 20k miles on mine, changed the entire exhaust system and added a different air filter, it would hit 60 in 2nd gear. Of course this is going by the on board speedo but may be why individual reports put it that low.

Very probably - Autocar generally test low mileage test cars with tight engines...but that applies to almost all their road test cars

[Kitchski]

s m said:

Penneth said:

s m said:

Impressive if they are accurately timed in the same manner as Autocar tests- they only managed a half second quicker for the Clio 197

I think it has something to do with the change between 2nd and 3rd. Once I'd put 20k miles on mine, changed the entire exhaust system and added a different air filter, it would hit 60 in 2nd gear. Of course this is going by the on board speedo but may be why individual reports put it that low.

Very probably - Autocar generally test low mileage test cars with tight engines...but that applies to almost all their road test cars

Whether a change is needed into 3rd to hit 60mph makes a massive difference (hence the big differences in timings between 0-60mph tests and 0-100kmh tests)

Different air filter, new exhaust and some mileage doesn't change where the rev limiter cuts in though.

[Darren61]

A great read. It's interesting how close they are related and shows how the clio has been bumped up the family slightly in terms of size and practicality. I would like to drive both back to back!

[Penneth]

Kitchski said:

Different air filter, new exhaust and some mileage doesn't change where the rev limiter cuts in though.

I knew someone would pick up on that!

It's something that I can only put down to the fact speedo's in general aren't accurate enough, and even more so when you're talking about a digital one such as the one in the Twingo that suffered from some lag.

Perhaps the added momentum of getting there slightly more quickly just tipped the slightly laggy speedo onto 60 mph when hitting the rev limiter? If someone could enlighten me with a proper theory, I'm all ears!

[s m]

Penneth said:

Perhaps the added momentum of getting there slightly more quickly just tipped the slightly laggy speedo onto 60 mph when hitting the rev limiter? If someone could enlighten me with a proper theory, I'm all ears!

Get it timed with some proper timing gear like Racelogic V-box and then you'll have a better idea

[number2301]

Is it just me who doesn't understand the point of the comparison? The Twingo is bigger in the outside yet loses a rear seat and a significant amount of boot space. It's ~50bhp down and significantly more expensive.

Again, what's the point? The twingo loses out on every aspect other than newness and economy. But who buys a trophy for economy?

[Mastodon2]

joshleb said:

Shame that a Ford Galaxy I've driven for uni has quicker 0-60 and top speed I think.

Yes, you'd be a fool to buy the Renaultsport option when the Ford Galaxy is the supeior car.

Fwiw, I like the RS Twingo, its the Toyota Prius-esque dash layout I can't get away with.

[roystinho]

I do quite like the twingo, but how you can compare it to a Trophy is beyond me. Miss my Trophy loads, it's the one car I regret selling as I had my head turned by a clio 200, and while the 200 was/is a great car, the Trophy had it licked in terms of sheer fun.

If I was in the market for a warm hatch, even being a lover of most things Renaultsport, I'd go for the Swift Sport every day over the Twingo

[TomTVR500]

I know they aren't rivals but it would have been nice to have a bit more in depth comparison between the way both handle your average b-road. Still an interesting write up though.

I am the very proud owner of a 182 Trophy and having been out in and driven many other cars (including the Twingo 133 Cup and a 182 Cup) I can honestly say I wouldn't swap it for much this side of £20,000, maybe a Cayman S or an R26.R but I still think I would miss the Trophy. I hope to hold onto it for as long as possible. Exceptional little car

[16v stretch]

Penneth said:

I think it has something to do with the change between 2nd and 3rd. Once I'd put 20k miles on mine, changed the entire exhaust system and added a different air filter, it would hit 60 in 2nd gear. Of course this is going by the on board speedo but may be why individual reports put it that low.

Did it hit 60 in 2nd before?

Do the gear ratio's change once you hit 20k miles?

Anyways, I think the twingo's kinda cute, I prefer the facelift rear to the prefacelift one. Potentially one for the swmbo as a city runaround though.

It'd be nicer on the eye if the roofline was a little lower, always looks narrow. Like the Agila/Splash etc.

[Noesph]

RenOHH said:

As with the new Clio 4, Renault design has taken a bad turn. The pre face lift Twingo 133 (above) is a pretty nice looking car.

+1

I liked the old design, the new design is just horrible.

[smartie93]

Penneth said:

I knew someone would pick up on that!

It's something that I can only put down to the fact speedo's in general aren't accurate enough, and even more so when you're talking about a digital one such as the one in the Twingo that suffered from some lag.

Perhaps the added momentum of getting there slightly more quickly just tipped the slightly laggy speedo onto 60 mph when hitting the rev limiter? If someone could enlighten me with a proper theory, I'm all ears!

Probably we're a bit kinder to the car when it was new I assume you mean a K&N style "Induction Kit" filter? If so your car is probably slightly slower. I'd take it off if i were you, the oil used in the cotton and foam filters wrecks hot wire MAF sensors (don't know what the renault runs), Which can cause havoc as i know too well :/

[va1o]

Haven't seen many facelift Twingos yet but I do quite like them. The 133 looks like a good buy although I'd be tempted to go for the cheaper TCE, 100bhp is still lots for a car that size!

[Penneth]

smartie93 said:

Probably we're a bit kinder to the car when it was new I assume you mean a K&N style "Induction Kit" filter? If so your car is probably slightly slower. I'd take it off if i were you, the oil used in the cotton and foam filters wrecks hot wire MAF sensors (don't know what the renault runs), Which can cause havoc as i know too well :/

God no! Replaced the really naff paper filter with a good quality panel filter from BMC.

Sold the car well over a year ago now. Miss it so much, especially as it sounded like a little rally car! - http://youtu.be/ONGKpYaHcJA

[KM666]

What do those twingo 133 engines go for?

Only it bears a remarkable resemblence to the K4M in my Megane... Infact I think it is a K4M. Could be a nice subtle engine swap if the price is right.

[Roma101]

IIRC there were only 450 UK Trophys. Switzerland (!) got the other 50.

[ukaskew]

Roma101 said:

IIRC there were only 450 UK Trophys. Switzerland (!) got the other 50.

Nope, the 50 Swiss bound cars were produced on top of the 500 for the UK.

[Blayney]

Nice to see some love for the twingo gt on here. One proud owner here.

[Hub]

I don't remember seeing a Twingo 133, are they quite rare? These small warm hatches, Suzuki Swift Sport etc should be more popular, but for some reason don't seem to be.

[loose cannon]

Blayney said:

Nice to see some love for the twingo gt on here. One proud owner here.

Just a shame nobody has picked up on how much fun they are, everytime I borrowed a car from work It had to be the twingo gt it's the nearest you will ever get to a 5 gt turbo :0)