2012 R.S Clio 200
Discussion
gez c16b said:
They're far from slower on track, quite the opposite if your talking standard vs standard.
I'm already a member of cliosport.net, been on there for 2-3 years from when I had my 172
Really well know when Top Gear had one the 182 was quicker same for fifth gear accept they doctored the results a few threads on the forum about it as one of the members cars was used. On the programme the 182 was ahead for the first section by nearly half a second then fell behind by other a second by the end very bizarre....I'm already a member of cliosport.net, been on there for 2-3 years from when I had my 172
But for me the 200 is the better car overall very nearly as fast but better looking, more kit and more usable on a day to day basis as much more spacious inside just wish I could afford one
KarlMac said:
It's grey, bland and thoughtless. Just look at all the touch points like hand brake and gear knob. Aren't these the same as fitted to the boggo models? Clocks look good though. It's a real shame because the outside and seats really look the business.
I love the concept of sporty clios. Always wanted a Williams, adore the V6 and have massive respect for the 172/182. I just couldn't stare at that grey awfulness for my daily commute.
It was one of the reasons I picked the ST over the VXR/Clio/Jap stuff. The interior is a really nice place to sit.
It's opinion. I completely respect your right to disagree.
They ST's interior is grey and bland too. Although made from better materials.I love the concept of sporty clios. Always wanted a Williams, adore the V6 and have massive respect for the 172/182. I just couldn't stare at that grey awfulness for my daily commute.
It was one of the reasons I picked the ST over the VXR/Clio/Jap stuff. The interior is a really nice place to sit.
It's opinion. I completely respect your right to disagree.
There's a reason why the Clio's are cheaper than your Mini's, Vauxhalls etc etc. You lose a bit of quality and fit and finsih. But you get huge brembos, Recaro seats etc etc. I know what i'd rather have!
philmots said:
They ST's interior is grey and bland too. Although made from better materials.
There's a reason why the Clio's are cheaper than your Mini's, Vauxhalls etc etc. You lose a bit of quality and fit and finsih. But you get huge brembos, Recaro seats etc etc. I know what i'd rather have!
Exactly your Focus ST is not a direct rival to the Clio either the Fiesta ST Mountune is which has a pretty sThere's a reason why the Clio's are cheaper than your Mini's, Vauxhalls etc etc. You lose a bit of quality and fit and finsih. But you get huge brembos, Recaro seats etc etc. I know what i'd rather have!
t interior to be honest. The middle spec clios and above have a better quality interior than bog standard ones and feel pretty solid to be honest. For me the 200 interior is more than good enough as the car is designed for driving it has lovely recaro seats, decent driving position and a nice feeling steering wheel with good looking and clear instruments. Certainly not amazing but as good as if not better than most of its rivals to be honest 
Also when comparing the Focus ST interior to its actual rival from Renault think I prefer the renault 2bh...
gez c16b said:
It's the cup model that has the shocking hard plastic dash and the basic dials on it,
This has the 'soft touch' dash and the nicer centre console.
It's a plain dash, but it had everything it needs to. Nothing worse than a busy dash IMO
In that way its similar to my Impreza, awesome seats, terrible dash! The plastics and design of both cars dashes is really terrible and quite low quality. This has the 'soft touch' dash and the nicer centre console.
It's a plain dash, but it had everything it needs to. Nothing worse than a busy dash IMO
They are fun little cars and if you can achieve 40mpg I'm impressed! Given its no slouch either although I think those 0-60 times are rather optimistic.
Good choice of car!
Lee
Gassing Station | Readers' Cars | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff