RE: Clio Renaultsport 197/200: PH buying guide
Discussion
Had my 200 for coming up to 6 months now and want to sell it.
Due to it being:
Slow
unreliable
terribly uncomfortable
terrible on fuel 24mpg average, 28 on the motorway at a push!
It covers ground on a b road fairly fast, but its ultimately dull(fwd)
diesels are quicker than it unless you're over 5k rpm and even then it doesn't leave them that quickly.
Due to it being:
Slow
unreliable
terribly uncomfortable
terrible on fuel 24mpg average, 28 on the motorway at a push!
It covers ground on a b road fairly fast, but its ultimately dull(fwd)
diesels are quicker than it unless you're over 5k rpm and even then it doesn't leave them that quickly.
towelie said:
Had my 200 for coming up to 6 months now and want to sell it.
Due to it being:
Slow
unreliable
terribly uncomfortable
terrible on fuel 24mpg average, 28 on the motorway at a push!
It covers ground on a b road fairly fast, but its ultimately dull(fwd)
diesels are quicker than it unless you're over 5k rpm and even then it doesn't leave them that quickly.
You summed things up much better than I managed to. Be prepared for some flaming. Due to it being:
Slow
unreliable
terribly uncomfortable
terrible on fuel 24mpg average, 28 on the motorway at a push!
It covers ground on a b road fairly fast, but its ultimately dull(fwd)
diesels are quicker than it unless you're over 5k rpm and even then it doesn't leave them that quickly.
I have a hunch on this reported poor mpg for the Clio 200, I used SUL from new and over 15000 miles it averaged 34.1mpg, this was from full tank fills and recorded miles, the trip computer regularly under-read by up to 2mpg.
I noticed some correlation between those that reported poor mpg and those that had also suggested that on the Clio forums claimed no running in was needed, the 'thrash it from new brigade'.
Before anyone says I drive like grandad, this was all types of mileage, but admittedly 80% motorway; mostly around 80mph as it spent most of it's time in France.
My car was owned from new following the running in guidance from my Renault dealer i.e. the first 500 miles never going above 5k rpm, the next 500 at varying revs with occasional follies into the change up beep. After 1000 miles releasing all the potential and finally giving it some stick.
Is it a coincidence it gave decent mpg and never burnt any oil, I think not.
I noticed some correlation between those that reported poor mpg and those that had also suggested that on the Clio forums claimed no running in was needed, the 'thrash it from new brigade'.
Before anyone says I drive like grandad, this was all types of mileage, but admittedly 80% motorway; mostly around 80mph as it spent most of it's time in France.
My car was owned from new following the running in guidance from my Renault dealer i.e. the first 500 miles never going above 5k rpm, the next 500 at varying revs with occasional follies into the change up beep. After 1000 miles releasing all the potential and finally giving it some stick.
Is it a coincidence it gave decent mpg and never burnt any oil, I think not.
Edited by KMB on Monday 1st September 20:23
Yes, the Clio 200 does give bad mileage, but more specifically, it doesn't give good mileage when driven gently. Even if you keep your foot off the pedal on a long motorway trip it won't do much better than 32mpg, when its overall average is 28.
So, that means it provides no incentive for driving it slowly and so you might get off the motorway and drive it properly — revving the nuts off it.
So, that means it provides no incentive for driving it slowly and so you might get off the motorway and drive it properly — revving the nuts off it.
When I sold mine (as mentioned above) the average mpg for the previous 1000 miles was 26.6. I didn't drive it slowly anywhere and due to the 'bitsa' exhaust it had the only speed you could drive at on the motorway was 86mph on cruise because 1mph either side it droned like crazy. My 172 Ph1 gets 36mpg for the equivalent driving style.
The cars that were run in by thrashing always make the most power in my experience.
The cars that were run in by thrashing always make the most power in my experience.
tim milne said:
Yes, the Clio 200 does give bad mileage, but more specifically, it doesn't give good mileage when driven gently. Even if you keep your foot off the pedal on a long motorway trip it won't do much better than 32mpg, when its overall average is 28.
That's strange, mine can easily average 36-38mpg on the motorway, and that's using bog standard tesco fuel...cailean said:
That's strange, mine can easily average 36-38mpg on the motorway, and that's using bog standard tesco fuel...
Sat at 80 I used to get 28, around town 30-32. The only car I've had thats more efficient in urban traffic. Not surprising though, given that it was revving its nuts off at 80, I reached for 7th quite a few times. Marmite car possibly?
hora said:
I'm very tempted. Would a 07 be reliable nowadays though or do bits drop off them.
They're just like any car, well cared for they will last. Treated poorly and not maintained they will suffer.Any 9 year old car will come with a bit of 'history', just make sure it's a good one.
They're pretty tough, apart from the gearboxes which were a frequent issue but if they've not failed by now they'll probably solider on.
The cambelt change is easy to bugger up if not done by someone who knows what they're doing. That'll leave the timing out but unless it's so bad it's in valves hitting pistons territory the car will still seem to run quite well, but will be severely lacking power at the top end. Drive several if you can.
The cambelt change is easy to bugger up if not done by someone who knows what they're doing. That'll leave the timing out but unless it's so bad it's in valves hitting pistons territory the car will still seem to run quite well, but will be severely lacking power at the top end. Drive several if you can.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff