RE: Shed of the Week: Renaultsport Clio 172
Discussion
MonkeySpanker said:
The cam pulleys are of a 'floating' design i.e there's no keyed locking device between the cams & the pulleys (the crank is the same). So you must lock the crank & the cams & then tension the belt, the pulleys can then & only then be tightened up. There's no timing marks so the only way to time these correctly is with the locking tools.
Very surprised at the floating design. So the timing is infinately variable (no vernier pullies required)? Is it just the torquing up of the pully nuts that stops them slipping?If the cams are dialled in at optimum or more aggressively, can you get a bit more power?
Rumple said:
yonex said:
DannyScene said:
I hate to do this and I've managed all my time on PH without suggesting this but most overrated car on PH has to be the MX5 surely?
or 3 series BMW's 
Most overrated car in pistonheads? Agree. An ITR DC2 does everything better, but granted, not for less than a grand. A ford puma is just as cheap but IMO is a better steer even if its not as quick.
My opinion on this one? Just buy it and run into the ground, don't bother trying to make it good, tried that, got the T-shirt, wouldn't bother again.
in what way are the brakes bad??
that said the brakes on the cup have different balance to the others and no abs.
did feel a bit over-assisted in a non-cup 172 I drove.
afaik the best bmw in the price range is a 325ti (fat and slow), cheapest bmw faster to 60 is a 330csi at twice the price for a tenth off your time (which you can probably claw back by spending the spare money on tyres and fresh suspension).
that said the brakes on the cup have different balance to the others and no abs.
did feel a bit over-assisted in a non-cup 172 I drove.
afaik the best bmw in the price range is a 325ti (fat and slow), cheapest bmw faster to 60 is a 330csi at twice the price for a tenth off your time (which you can probably claw back by spending the spare money on tyres and fresh suspension).
Edited by scarble on Saturday 2nd November 15:45
scarble said:
in what way are the brakes bad??
that said the brakes on the cup have different balance to the others and no abs.
did feel a bit over-assisted in a non-cup 172 I drove.
afaik the best bmw in the price range is a 325ti (fat and slow), cheapest bmw faster to 60 is a 330csi at twice the price for a tenth off your time (which you can probably claw back by spending the spare money on tyres and fresh suspension).
The 172 brakes were OK, but on the 182 I had they faded quite easily, I believe it was due to the design of the wheel not giving good airflow to the brakes.that said the brakes on the cup have different balance to the others and no abs.
did feel a bit over-assisted in a non-cup 172 I drove.
afaik the best bmw in the price range is a 325ti (fat and slow), cheapest bmw faster to 60 is a 330csi at twice the price for a tenth off your time (which you can probably claw back by spending the spare money on tyres and fresh suspension).
Edited by scarble on Saturday 2nd November 15:45
No chance you would get a 325ti for £1,000 or less, and as for slow, I'm sure it would have a 1*2 in a straight line. Even my "fat and slow" 328i would have the measure of the Clio in a straight line, but to be honest, who cares, there's more to cars than raw speed, and if that's what gives your kicks, then you would not buy a Clio.
They're OK little karts, but I would either avoid this one, or buy it but not spend anything much on it, and just enjoy it for however long it lasts. But the way some people talk on here, you would think they were the pinnacle of driving enjoyment, when really, they're just a bit of cheap fun and nothing more (not in my case mind, but I made the mistake of trying to make it into a minter).
I know you feel strongly about this but are you trying to fillibuster me or what?
I was comparing the 325ti to the ~2k you'd pay for a ph2 cup like mine (as in, I looked at the 325ti at the time). non-cup ph2 0-60 is 6.9 and cup is 6.7 (going by parkers). 6.7 seems a big jump for a few kgs but I think they're geared slightly shorter and the suspension may help. Both go up to ~140 (maybe 137, idk). ph1 is 7.0/138
325ti is 6.9/146 for a manual or smg (autos are 7.9
), so not only is it going to be marginal up against even a non-cup clio in a straight line, I think it'd struggle on lanes and tracks (especially tight ones) as it weighs 1480kg, more than 400kg over the clio.
Don't get me wrong, having owned a cup for a while now the comfort of a BMW is somewhat alluring on cold dank evenings when you leave the office at silly o-clock and have a cold and blah blah blah or for the m6 where every expansion gap as you drive over birmingham makes you wince in the clio but on a crisp morning as the mist is just clearing and the morning sun is filtering through the trees as you lift off and take a breather over a crest and are greeted by a well sighted and completely empty country lane, in that scenario, I'll take the clio please.
I was comparing the 325ti to the ~2k you'd pay for a ph2 cup like mine (as in, I looked at the 325ti at the time). non-cup ph2 0-60 is 6.9 and cup is 6.7 (going by parkers). 6.7 seems a big jump for a few kgs but I think they're geared slightly shorter and the suspension may help. Both go up to ~140 (maybe 137, idk). ph1 is 7.0/138
325ti is 6.9/146 for a manual or smg (autos are 7.9
), so not only is it going to be marginal up against even a non-cup clio in a straight line, I think it'd struggle on lanes and tracks (especially tight ones) as it weighs 1480kg, more than 400kg over the clio.Don't get me wrong, having owned a cup for a while now the comfort of a BMW is somewhat alluring on cold dank evenings when you leave the office at silly o-clock and have a cold and blah blah blah or for the m6 where every expansion gap as you drive over birmingham makes you wince in the clio but on a crisp morning as the mist is just clearing and the morning sun is filtering through the trees as you lift off and take a breather over a crest and are greeted by a well sighted and completely empty country lane, in that scenario, I'll take the clio please.
Skylinecrazy said:
That's insanely cheap!
The wheels are 700 quid alone!!
Love my cup, probably the best front wheel drive car I've driven, that includes the 200.
By £700 you mean £350 - £400...The wheels are 700 quid alone!!
Love my cup, probably the best front wheel drive car I've driven, that includes the 200.
But yes it was cheap was on a dodgy facebook modified car site she had no interest at £1200 so stuck it up at £900 the car looked in very good nick apart from a stupid black bonnet but I missed out by 4 minutes I could have offered £50 more and took the car but didn't want to be harsh. I was only going to change the bonnet write a better advert and stick it up for £1750 anyway...
scarble said:
I know you feel strongly about this but are you trying to fillibuster me or what?
I was comparing the 325ti to the ~2k you'd pay for a ph2 cup like mine (as in, I looked at the 325ti at the time). non-cup ph2 0-60 is 6.9 and cup is 6.7 (going by parkers). 6.7 seems a big jump for a few kgs but I think they're geared slightly shorter and the suspension may help. Both go up to ~140 (maybe 137, idk). ph1 is 7.0/138
325ti is 6.9/146 for a manual or smg (autos are 7.9), so not only is it going to be marginal up against even a non-cup clio in a straight line, I think it'd struggle on lanes and tracks (especially tight ones) as it weighs 1480kg, more than 400kg over the clio.
Don't get me wrong, having owned a cup for a while now the comfort of a BMW is somewhat alluring on cold dank evenings when you leave the office at silly o-clock and have a cold and blah blah blah or for the m6 where every expansion gap as you drive over birmingham makes you wince in the clio but on a crisp morning as the mist is just clearing and the morning sun is filtering through the trees as you lift off and take a breather over a crest and are greeted by a well sighted and completely empty country lane, in that scenario, I'll take the clio please.
What makes you think I feel strongly about it, the fact I had a triple post? I was comparing the 325ti to the ~2k you'd pay for a ph2 cup like mine (as in, I looked at the 325ti at the time). non-cup ph2 0-60 is 6.9 and cup is 6.7 (going by parkers). 6.7 seems a big jump for a few kgs but I think they're geared slightly shorter and the suspension may help. Both go up to ~140 (maybe 137, idk). ph1 is 7.0/138
325ti is 6.9/146 for a manual or smg (autos are 7.9
), so not only is it going to be marginal up against even a non-cup clio in a straight line, I think it'd struggle on lanes and tracks (especially tight ones) as it weighs 1480kg, more than 400kg over the clio.Don't get me wrong, having owned a cup for a while now the comfort of a BMW is somewhat alluring on cold dank evenings when you leave the office at silly o-clock and have a cold and blah blah blah or for the m6 where every expansion gap as you drive over birmingham makes you wince in the clio but on a crisp morning as the mist is just clearing and the morning sun is filtering through the trees as you lift off and take a breather over a crest and are greeted by a well sighted and completely empty country lane, in that scenario, I'll take the clio please.
That was an accident I promise.Not much in it in a straight, although I feel at higher speeds the BMW's superior aerodynamics would have it, as well as the extra torque, especially as at higher speeds, the weight of the car has less bearing.
0-60 should be similar, my E46 328 has been quoted as 6.5 seconds 0-100 kmh. RWD cars launch better so again negates the weight. I got a 14.2 second quarter mile at Brunters in a standard E36 328 and matched a highly tuned FWD Ibiza 1.8T Cupra, mainly because I could launch much harder.
I'm pretty sure I could keep up with a 1*2 in the lanes in my 328 and I'm not sure a 325ti would be any worse. Theres lots of grip here and compliant suspension and good weight distribution.
Anyway, who cares about all that, I personally don't find the Clio any more fun particularly, but everyone is different, no way you would find me giving up the RWD handling, sweet, smooth and sonorous 6 pot and the looks and interior of the BMW for a Clio ever again. If you love the Clio then thats fine, but I couldn't be arsed with them any more these days (and that goes for any other tinny hatchback for that matter).
I just didn't think the Clio was all that, even for a FWD "hot hatch", yeah it's quick, but I just think some other equivalent cars are a better steer (Puma, 106 GTI etc). Speed isn't everything.
Oh, fillibuster?!!!
Edited by TameRacingDriver on Saturday 2nd November 17:53
Alex10391 said:
Don't know how anyone can say the brakes are poor on these, the brakes are excellent as standard but even better with some updated pads and discs. They are just very sorted all well round drive wise
The 182 wheels did not permit good air flow to the brakes, many owners changed them for the speedline turinis on the 172 cup for this reason.I upgraded my pads and they were better (but hopeless when cold).
Also the car because of the weight distribution dived hard under heavy braking and was unstable (back end used to fishtail).
Try driving a DC2 with new OEM pads and discs and you'll see how poor they are. Those brakes took repeated abuse for mile after mile, and the car remained completely planted and stable at all times.
Yes, filibuster, I may have put too many ls in last time but I'm sure you could still understand?
E46 328i, 0-60/power/weight = 6.8/149/1465
so even with your superior RWD traction it's 0.2 faster than a ph1, 0.1 to a ph2 and 0.1 slower than a 172 cup.
I can only conclude that either your clios were broken, you tried to make them go fast cold (they don't) or you're for some reason jealous of clios.
SWMBO make you get a practical car? Thought you were trading up only to find you were stuck with a barge?
Shall we just agree to disagree?
Personally I like the Clio because it's tinny, I am opposed to the whole NVH thingie, some comfort is necessary sure but most of it is unnecessary and is killing the planet!!
E46 328i, 0-60/power/weight = 6.8/149/1465
so even with your superior RWD traction it's 0.2 faster than a ph1, 0.1 to a ph2 and 0.1 slower than a 172 cup.
I can only conclude that either your clios were broken, you tried to make them go fast cold (they don't) or you're for some reason jealous of clios.
SWMBO make you get a practical car? Thought you were trading up only to find you were stuck with a barge?
Shall we just agree to disagree?
Personally I like the Clio because it's tinny, I am opposed to the whole NVH thingie, some comfort is necessary sure but most of it is unnecessary and is killing the planet!!
Edited by scarble on Saturday 2nd November 18:26
Of all the Clio RSs that I've driven, I think the Ph1 is the most fun, on account of its rawness. Totally agree with the previous poster who said the later models feel too refined. Refinement defeats the point of an RS. This is the last Cliosport with a mechanical throttle. The electronic throttle versions may be a snip faster on paper (due to lower gearing - if you throw out the Ph1 spare wheel I wonder how much the difference would be?), but they feel strangely 'detached', as if the management system is overriding you.
scarble said:
Shall we just agree to disagree?
Probably best. I don't really care which car would have its nose in front in a drag race that would see us being banned and heavily fined, such is the country we live in.At one time I would always have preferred the light little tinny clio, but now, I'm more into having a car that can put a smile on my face, but also feel good doing the mundane s
t, like karting my GF around, who you appear to think dictates my choice in cars, but in actual fact has no influence whatsoever on my choice of vehicle. Fact is, she doesn't share my passion for exploring the limit of grip around a tight sliproad/roundabout whilst flat out in second You like the Clio. I also did find it fairly entertaining, but not really as good as most seem to say on here. To me, it was just like any other Clio, but with more grip and a lot more power, and as such, not really anything special. Sorry.
flat16 said:
Of all the Clio RSs that I've driven, I think the Ph1 is the most fun, on account of its rawness. Totally agree with the previous poster who said the later models feel too refined. Refinement defeats the point of an RS. This is the last Cliosport with a mechanical throttle. The electronic throttle versions may be a snip faster on paper (due to lower gearing - if you throw out the Ph1 spare wheel I wonder how much the difference would be?), but they feel strangely 'detached', as if the management system is overriding you.
Totally agreed, as I said earlier, the Phase 1 at least felt a little raw and old school, the 182 just sucked all of the life out of it for me.Limpet said:
This is a commonly used setup nowadays. The Alfa Busso V6 is the same, as is the Ford Zetec. It's very logical from an engineering viewpoint, as it means the tension gets spread evenly across the entire belt instead of bearing mostly on the tensioner side of the cam pulleys.
Every day is a school day. greggy50 said:
apart from a stupid black bonnet
When a mate sold his Megane 225 I told him to remove the R27 stickers and the 'fake' carbon bonnet as it made it look like a thrashed nail (which it largely wasn't) - but he said he couldn't remove the cf 'sticker' bonnet because there were vandal scratches under it!! 
So there's something else to consider when you see that stuff - it's not just a chav-choice - it may be the pebble-dashing on the motorworld, hiding many a sin.
Gixer_fan said:
MonkeySpanker said:
The cam pulleys are of a 'floating' design i.e there's no keyed locking device between the cams & the pulleys (the crank is the same). So you must lock the crank & the cams & then tension the belt, the pulleys can then & only then be tightened up. There's no timing marks so the only way to time these correctly is with the locking tools.
Very surprised at the floating design. So the timing is infinately variable (no vernier pullies required)? Is it just the torquing up of the pully nuts that stops them slipping?If the cams are dialled in at optimum or more aggressively, can you get a bit more power?
The cam timing's not 'infinitely' variable but in theory you could tweak the valve timing as much as you wanted......or until the valves hit the pistons.
I've only scanned this thread so I'm probably repeating much of what's already been said.
We have one of these, albeit in much better nick! I was tempted to buy it as a spare
Huge amount of fun, especially for the money. It's a very tactile car and a rewarding drive, I upgraded the brakes, springs and added a rear anti-rollbar which has improved it further IMO.
We've spent loads on ours because it was originally looked after and I've always made sure it got the correct treatment as too many get trashed due to the low price vs performance. Insurance was as much, if not more, than the Elise!
Not sure I'd be happy with a £600 example but with the right TLC it'd make an excellent track slag
We have one of these, albeit in much better nick! I was tempted to buy it as a spare
Huge amount of fun, especially for the money. It's a very tactile car and a rewarding drive, I upgraded the brakes, springs and added a rear anti-rollbar which has improved it further IMO.
We've spent loads on ours because it was originally looked after and I've always made sure it got the correct treatment as too many get trashed due to the low price vs performance. Insurance was as much, if not more, than the Elise!
Not sure I'd be happy with a £600 example but with the right TLC it'd make an excellent track slag
TameRacingDriver said:
Probably best. I don't really care which car would have its nose in front in a drag race that would see us being banned and heavily fined, such is the country we live in.
At one time I would always have preferred the light little tinny clio, but now, I'm more into having a car that can put a smile on my face, but also feel good doing the mundane st, like karting my GF around, who you appear to think dictates my choice in cars, but in actual fact has no influence whatsoever on my choice of vehicle. Fact is, she doesn't share my passion for exploring the limit of grip around a tight sliproad/roundabout whilst flat out in second
You like the Clio. I also did find it fairly entertaining, but not really as good as most seem to say on here. To me, it was just like any other Clio, but with more grip and a lot more power, and as such, not really anything special. Sorry.
hmm, i'm not saying you don't know what you're talking about, but.. i can't think how to end this sentence. what is your actual experience for bagging the RS clio? you don't mention any track experience but you are bagging the brakes, you've owned 2 BMWs and seen a tuned ibiza? please elaborate on your credentials.At one time I would always have preferred the light little tinny clio, but now, I'm more into having a car that can put a smile on my face, but also feel good doing the mundane s
t, like karting my GF around, who you appear to think dictates my choice in cars, but in actual fact has no influence whatsoever on my choice of vehicle. Fact is, she doesn't share my passion for exploring the limit of grip around a tight sliproad/roundabout whilst flat out in second You like the Clio. I also did find it fairly entertaining, but not really as good as most seem to say on here. To me, it was just like any other Clio, but with more grip and a lot more power, and as such, not really anything special. Sorry.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff