Facinating find: Renault Clio Cup vs Audi R8 V10
Discussion
Anyone read the new evo this month where they compare the Renault racing Clio Cup to the Audi R8 v10? The Renault really dominates it. I did and it's very interesting. Not unlike a test in evo a few years back where they pitting an older Impreza WRC car against the latest crop of mid-engine wonder-cars only to see them lose to the WRC car easily.
I really don't think enough is said about the inherent supercar crushing ability of very well modded hatches or similar small front engine sedans. There is a myth perpetuated by the magazines and on-line that a mid-engine car is so much better, but really they can often be worse. I think there is a need to romance the mid-rear engine cars because they are usually very pretty and sleek and low and unique to look at. I'd prefer a small q-car Clio Cup any day of the decade. martin
I really don't think enough is said about the inherent supercar crushing ability of very well modded hatches or similar small front engine sedans. There is a myth perpetuated by the magazines and on-line that a mid-engine car is so much better, but really they can often be worse. I think there is a need to romance the mid-rear engine cars because they are usually very pretty and sleek and low and unique to look at. I'd prefer a small q-car Clio Cup any day of the decade. martin
Evo (or at least Harry Metcalfe) have been big fans of the little Renaults for a while.
Love this vid -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTTI-aMKn60
Love this vid -
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTTI-aMKn60
would disagree about road use as the WRC car they compared to the exotics a while back was found to be great in all road conditions. Maybe that's the four wheel drive helping but I think this Clio could easily be engineered to be fine for road use and yes still blow the lids off the new generation uber cars we read too much about. martin
martin elaman said:
I think this Clio could easily be engineered to be fine for road use and yes still blow the lids off the new generation uber cars we read too much about. martin
Have you ever driven a track prepared car on the road? Making it "fine for road use" would reduce its track performance substantially.martin elaman said:
would disagree about road use as the WRC car they compared to the exotics a while back was found to be great in all road conditions. Maybe that's the four wheel drive helping but I think this Clio could easily be engineered to be fine for road use and yes still blow the lids off the new generation uber cars we read too much about. martin
I am a fan of Renaultsport, currently own one even. I would say an R26 Meg is a track car engineered for the road as you put it. I doubt it could show a well driven Exige a clean pair of heels never mind an Uber car (Uber car meaning Mac P1, LAF, 918 right?)It is a good article, the megane one got me though. I can't believe the current crop of hot hatches are within a few seconds of older supercar times around the ring.
The new megane trophy - 7.54.36
Lamboghini LP640 - 7.47
That's 7 second difference, utter madness for a car that has less than half the bhp!
The new megane trophy - 7.54.36
Lamboghini LP640 - 7.47
That's 7 second difference, utter madness for a car that has less than half the bhp!
Tickle said:
I read the article, agree very inserting..... but it is a race car against a road car and the test was on a track. I don't think the result was a shocker
Agreed. For a start tyres make a massive difference on race cars. As does weight. As does asking a car to only do one thing, as opposed to many often conflicting things.
Basically an interesting article though to see how apples and oranges compare.
Not read the article yet, but there is no doubt the older 182 Cup models are / were, pound for pound, one of the best "fun cars" ever made.
With the right tyres, they will just grip and grip. In the dry or wet. Very responsive steering for the price-point. And surprisingly reliable.
The Renaultsport division is basically the FWD equivalent of the RWD BMW M division or Porsche. Renaultsport deserve more credit for that.
With the right tyres, they will just grip and grip. In the dry or wet. Very responsive steering for the price-point. And surprisingly reliable.
The Renaultsport division is basically the FWD equivalent of the RWD BMW M division or Porsche. Renaultsport deserve more credit for that.
I agree re Renaultsport. Great cars.
The current battle for 'ring times between hot hatches is pretty embarrassing, though. It comes down ultimately to which manufacturer is willing to produce (and lose money on) the most obviously non-road version of its hatch. Nobody buys a hatch with semi-slicks, rock hard suspension and 2mm of clearance, so it is all a bit silly.
The current battle for 'ring times between hot hatches is pretty embarrassing, though. It comes down ultimately to which manufacturer is willing to produce (and lose money on) the most obviously non-road version of its hatch. Nobody buys a hatch with semi-slicks, rock hard suspension and 2mm of clearance, so it is all a bit silly.
Would be more interesting with a road going Clio Cup 
Also slicks are a bit unfair.. and the aero.. and straight cut gears
Here's something similar, MP412C vs. Fireblade vs. Civic (BTCC)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0ZyQhROBE
I have a 172 Cup and the grip can be mind bending in the right conditions but it is a bit lary, traction isn't great and I don't think it'd keep with an R8 really. It'll be more fun though
(As an aside, the 182 Cup isn't really a "cup", more of a base-spec version of the regular car, from what I've heard it's no lighter than the regular one and I think it still has TC and ABS, not sure about AC.)
Also slicks are a bit unfair.. and the aero.. and straight cut gears
Here's something similar, MP412C vs. Fireblade vs. Civic (BTCC)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uj0ZyQhROBE
I have a 172 Cup and the grip can be mind bending in the right conditions but it is a bit lary, traction isn't great and I don't think it'd keep with an R8 really. It'll be more fun though
(As an aside, the 182 Cup isn't really a "cup", more of a base-spec version of the regular car, from what I've heard it's no lighter than the regular one and I think it still has TC and ABS, not sure about AC.)
Edited by scarble on Thursday 24th July 11:20
I'm not surprised really - years ago my Friends ran a few Mk1 Golf GTi's in LMA Euro Saloons, they didn't have a huge amount of power - 160bhp-170bhp maybe, but they'd run rings around contemporary standard road M3's and 911 at the annual Charity track day - and the Clio Cup cars were much faster than our old Golfs.
They'd be absolutely useless on the road though, frankly they were so stiff if you ever tried to drive them quickly on the road they'd be a complete liability - well if they didn't over-heat at the first sign of traffic, or deafen anyone not wearing plugs and a helmet or s
t a piston (they did that a lot, we weren't a great outfit).
They'd be absolutely useless on the road though, frankly they were so stiff if you ever tried to drive them quickly on the road they'd be a complete liability - well if they didn't over-heat at the first sign of traffic, or deafen anyone not wearing plugs and a helmet or s
t a piston (they did that a lot, we weren't a great outfit).martin elaman said:
Anyone read the new evo this month where they compare the Renault racing Clio Cup to the Audi R8 v10? The Renault really dominates it. I did and it's very interesting. Not unlike a test in evo a few years back where they pitting an older Impreza WRC car against the latest crop of mid-engine wonder-cars only to see them lose to the WRC car easily.
I really don't think enough is said about the inherent supercar crushing ability of very well modded hatches or similar small front engine sedans. There is a myth perpetuated by the magazines and on-line that a mid-engine car is so much better, but really they can often be worse. I think there is a need to romance the mid-rear engine cars because they are usually very pretty and sleek and low and unique to look at. I'd prefer a small q-car Clio Cup any day of the decade. martin
If you're starting from a clean sheet to build a fast car with the minimum of compromises then mid-engined is clearly the way to go. I really don't think enough is said about the inherent supercar crushing ability of very well modded hatches or similar small front engine sedans. There is a myth perpetuated by the magazines and on-line that a mid-engine car is so much better, but really they can often be worse. I think there is a need to romance the mid-rear engine cars because they are usually very pretty and sleek and low and unique to look at. I'd prefer a small q-car Clio Cup any day of the decade. martin
The test's entertaining but it tells you nothing about the relative merits of the two - it's just 'race car beats lardy road car'. How about swapping the R8 for the GT3 version with a proper track setup, gearbox etc the same as the Clio? Would you bet on the little hatchback?
JDMDrifter said:
It is a good article, the megane one got me though. I can't believe the current crop of hot hatches are within a few seconds of older supercar times around the ring.
The new megane trophy - 7.54.36
Lamboghini LP640 - 7.47
That's 7 second difference, utter madness for a car that has less than half the bhp!
What gets me more is that the last section is a massive straight where the Hot hatch wouldn't have a chance. Which in turn means the hot hatch must have got round the corners a fair bit quicker than the lamborghini, and it was more of a case that the LP640 managed to "catch up" on the last straightThe new megane trophy - 7.54.36
Lamboghini LP640 - 7.47
That's 7 second difference, utter madness for a car that has less than half the bhp!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff