RE: Renaultsport Clio 200 - full details
Discussion
Here's a video complete with engine sound. And yes, that's the real engine sound.
http://youtu.be/lgkvXCAp_SQ
Good up shifts, take it to the red line. Looks promising.
http://youtu.be/lgkvXCAp_SQ
Good up shifts, take it to the red line. Looks promising.
They´ve changed every aspect, that made the current model appreciated and sought-after by the buyers. So to whom they are going to sell this scarely looking 5-door automatic fake engine noise van? They´ve had one segment of the market for themselves only, now the Clio RS will be fighting against plethora of other dull quick-ish hatchback competitors for people, who doesn´t really care about driving. Maybe one generation will live from the good reputation of Renaultsport from past, but you only lose your name once. Already did that with Gordini.
Edited by Zajda on Saturday 16th February 01:32
The only good things about the old clio's were the good handling and the fun driving experience.
The engines were always boring and nothing special
The interior was horrid(recaros aside)
Crap build quality
Reliability was generally poor
Dealers were crap
A terribly over rated model, yes they are fun to drive but the rest if it is s
te.
Hopefully the new one should address these problems and still be a good steer.
The engines were always boring and nothing special
The interior was horrid(recaros aside)
Crap build quality
Reliability was generally poor
Dealers were crap
A terribly over rated model, yes they are fun to drive but the rest if it is s
te.Hopefully the new one should address these problems and still be a good steer.
I have seen a few of these new Clios in the last couple of days outside my local Renault dealer & the car looks striking & modern & easy to custom. One thing surprised me was how big it is, it's about the size of the old Megane.
Renault are not selling cars of any type at the moment & seemed to be stuck in design rut, so you can't blame them for trying something different.
Renault are not selling cars of any type at the moment & seemed to be stuck in design rut, so you can't blame them for trying something different.
Edited by Stack on Saturday 16th February 15:44
I wish they'd go the whole way and make all cars black box fitted robot controlled, since most cars are boring these days. You don't feel nothing in a car, no sense of speed nothing which results in them doing things like fit electric speakers to these stupid cars. Biking is where it's at, the only adrenaline rush available these days on the road, I'd like robot controlled cars for safer biking. In the meantime even a 600 sports bike and a Dacia sandero would be a hundreds times better ownership proposition than this stupid Clio.
How can so many people be so anti a car that hasn't even been driven by journos yet? Let alone the fact that they haven't driven it themselves?
Until you do why come out with such negative comments? I can understand the annoyance re the lack of manual option and the sound technology but we have no idea how good it is yet.
Until you do why come out with such negative comments? I can understand the annoyance re the lack of manual option and the sound technology but we have no idea how good it is yet.
Because it´s concept is all wrong as a drivers car. And I think that journos test, useful in some aspects, are 99% useless in some other aspects. Bad ideas and solutions are spreading like a plague amongst the industry and journos tend to accept that as an inevitable fact and apologize intergenarational degradation of important car characteristics with cliches. I can very much imagine the comments from reviews of the new Clio RS - "new electromechanical steering - it maybe lost some of the feedback, but it´s very precise and you can place car accurately blah blah". "New engine doesn´t rev that high now, but you have more performance low down, and while lacking some character of the old two litre, it´s very effective and has vastly improved economy and emissions" etc.
Yes, manufacturers have to explore new solutions, these days mainly because of stupid CO2 campaign, but I don´t understand why majority of the car testers doesn´t have the guts to say that worse things are really worse. There is no pressure at all from the magazines and customers which could led to improving cars from the customers point of view. If customers of the US BMW said that they don´t want to use STOP/START and if they turned it off, they want the car to remember, the BMW responded and reprogrammed software in their cars. But in Soviet Europe, we have our liquidation CO2 taxes for manufacturers (and in UK you sadly have it as an insurers too) and we no longer have anything to say about how we like our cars. You may consider these whole column as a very far off-topic, but if you give it another thought, it really isn´t. Only because of deluded thinking we have engines, which are slightly more economical when you drive them as a grandad (which could be a useful feature in your commute vehicle), but in majority they are much more thirstier when you drive them in any other manner. Only because of deluded thinking, the official consumption numbers could come out from test, in which methodics there are simulations like 0-31 MPH for 26 seconds etc. And only because of that, even our sportscars of today could have no feel from the steering, terrible response to the throttle particulary at low RPMs and gears so long, that you could use mostly 2 of them in your B-road blast.
Yes, manufacturers have to explore new solutions, these days mainly because of stupid CO2 campaign, but I don´t understand why majority of the car testers doesn´t have the guts to say that worse things are really worse. There is no pressure at all from the magazines and customers which could led to improving cars from the customers point of view. If customers of the US BMW said that they don´t want to use STOP/START and if they turned it off, they want the car to remember, the BMW responded and reprogrammed software in their cars. But in Soviet Europe, we have our liquidation CO2 taxes for manufacturers (and in UK you sadly have it as an insurers too) and we no longer have anything to say about how we like our cars. You may consider these whole column as a very far off-topic, but if you give it another thought, it really isn´t. Only because of deluded thinking we have engines, which are slightly more economical when you drive them as a grandad (which could be a useful feature in your commute vehicle), but in majority they are much more thirstier when you drive them in any other manner. Only because of deluded thinking, the official consumption numbers could come out from test, in which methodics there are simulations like 0-31 MPH for 26 seconds etc. And only because of that, even our sportscars of today could have no feel from the steering, terrible response to the throttle particulary at low RPMs and gears so long, that you could use mostly 2 of them in your B-road blast.
While I think you're a little harsh, I agree on the absurdity of the CO2 led engine choices. Turbo engines are only perceived as efficient because they happen to be good at official testing, which have no correlation with real world driving / mpg / emmissions.
Besides, no one mentions the problems/cost associated with turbo / intercoolers / plumbing when the car is 3 or 4 years old.
Besides, no one mentions the problems/cost associated with turbo / intercoolers / plumbing when the car is 3 or 4 years old.
Finally saw a new Clio in the flesh for the firs time today. I was very impressed! Much better looking than the photos suggest, it looked very solid, for lack of a better word. The lines of the car just seemed to work, and the red metallic paint looked great on it.
Rear doors were good, lots of rear leg room, the boot was pretty roomy too - definitely an improvement over my old MK6 Fiesta, but obviously not quite as big as the Megane.
Interior plastics were very nice. Huge improvement over the old Clio, and I think a setup up from the Megane. Seating position was very good even on the cooking model I sat in.
Rear doors were good, lots of rear leg room, the boot was pretty roomy too - definitely an improvement over my old MK6 Fiesta, but obviously not quite as big as the Megane.
Interior plastics were very nice. Huge improvement over the old Clio, and I think a setup up from the Megane. Seating position was very good even on the cooking model I sat in.
framerateuk said:
Finally saw a new Clio in the flesh for the firs time today. I was very impressed! Much better looking than the photos suggest, it looked very solid, for lack of a better word. The lines of the car just seemed to work, and the red metallic paint looked great on it.
Rear doors were good, lots of rear leg room, the boot was pretty roomy too - definitely an improvement over my old MK6 Fiesta, but obviously not quite as big as the Megane.
Interior plastics were very nice. Huge improvement over the old Clio, and I think a setup up from the Megane. Seating position was very good even on the cooking model I sat in.
How dare you give dispassionate, useful and pragmatic feedback on a car that you've actually seen and touched rather than slag it off without having a clue what the car actually is like ? Shocking behaviour. Not at all what is expected here.Rear doors were good, lots of rear leg room, the boot was pretty roomy too - definitely an improvement over my old MK6 Fiesta, but obviously not quite as big as the Megane.
Interior plastics were very nice. Huge improvement over the old Clio, and I think a setup up from the Megane. Seating position was very good even on the cooking model I sat in.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff