£6k Celica T - Sport or Clio 182? Or any suggestions
Discussion
As per title,
I'm only 22 (23 in a couple of weeks
) so hopefully will bring insurance down a bit more.
Im looking at the celica mainly as its only a 1.8, where as the clio is a 2.0. But whatever I get i'm looking to take it on a trackday or two.
Was originally looking at an Integra DC2, but it all fell through and I think i'd prefer something a little newer.
What are your opinions on these cars? the only thing I worry about is if I took a clio on a trackday it'd fall over. I've seen it happed far too often.
Any suggestions for what to look for in these? or any other suggestions?
Cheers all,
Tim.
I'm only 22 (23 in a couple of weeks
) so hopefully will bring insurance down a bit more. Im looking at the celica mainly as its only a 1.8, where as the clio is a 2.0. But whatever I get i'm looking to take it on a trackday or two.
Was originally looking at an Integra DC2, but it all fell through and I think i'd prefer something a little newer.
What are your opinions on these cars? the only thing I worry about is if I took a clio on a trackday it'd fall over. I've seen it happed far too often.
Any suggestions for what to look for in these? or any other suggestions?
Cheers all,
Tim.
You've seen a clio fall over? they're one of the best handling hot hatches of all time.
The Celica T sport is a bit gutless. Its all nothing nothing nothing LIFTTTTT and change gear, its also overpriced because the Corolla T sport is exactly the same car (with misquoted 0-60 times on the internet so ignore them, its the same engine, gearbox etc as the celica and very very similar weights)
The Celica T sport is a bit gutless. Its all nothing nothing nothing LIFTTTTT and change gear, its also overpriced because the Corolla T sport is exactly the same car (with misquoted 0-60 times on the internet so ignore them, its the same engine, gearbox etc as the celica and very very similar weights)
Having owned a Celica, I''ve got to say, Tyranical does have an excellent point.
I love the 182, I just have a thing about Clio's, everyone I know who has owned one has had issues, including the 182 owner next door to me. He's looking at going Jap next.
It's got to be said........MX5? Well balanced track car and daily drive.
I love the 182, I just have a thing about Clio's, everyone I know who has owned one has had issues, including the 182 owner next door to me. He's looking at going Jap next.
It's got to be said........MX5? Well balanced track car and daily drive.
I may be a bit biased as I own one, but I had a similar choice to you but i was looking at clio or ibiza.
I chose an Ibiza FR purely on tuning potential, its not in the same league as the clio handling wise, but its still good fun to me and the engines nice and tuneable, 150bhp as standard, had mine remapped and uprated recirc valve fitted at performance torque and its now pushing 215bhp, faster (in a strainght line) than your little clio's, a bit thirsty on the old juice though.
I chose an Ibiza FR purely on tuning potential, its not in the same league as the clio handling wise, but its still good fun to me and the engines nice and tuneable, 150bhp as standard, had mine remapped and uprated recirc valve fitted at performance torque and its now pushing 215bhp, faster (in a strainght line) than your little clio's, a bit thirsty on the old juice though.
robsco said:
The I'm not trying to be a thread troll Saxaboom, but it almost sounds from your posts as though you've already made your own mind up?
you're right, but I'm open to other suggestions 
.But I think I would be happy with the celica. I like the fact on here people suggest thing I havn't thought of yet.
Saxaboom said:
robsco said:
The I'm not trying to be a thread troll Saxaboom, but it almost sounds from your posts as though you've already made your own mind up?
you're right, but I'm open to other suggestions .But I think I would be happy with the celica. I like the fact on here people suggest thing I havn't thought of yet.
I've no experience of a 182 unfortunately so I can't pass comment on that. Whatever you decide, good luck!I'll give you a biased answer.
I've not had a Clio, but have had a Celica 190. Me and some mates went to a trackday, and one of my friends was driving a Clio 172, and he drove rings around me. The Clio was just faster, and it didn't fall over.
A lot of this could be down to my lack of talent as a driver, but the fast Clios don't have the reputation they do for nothing.
However, as an ownership proposition I think the Celica is a lot better, not only in reliability terms, in looks, but also in day to day driving - I sold my Celica last year and I've really regretted it since - it was just a great all-rounder.
I've not had a Clio, but have had a Celica 190. Me and some mates went to a trackday, and one of my friends was driving a Clio 172, and he drove rings around me. The Clio was just faster, and it didn't fall over.
A lot of this could be down to my lack of talent as a driver, but the fast Clios don't have the reputation they do for nothing.However, as an ownership proposition I think the Celica is a lot better, not only in reliability terms, in looks, but also in day to day driving - I sold my Celica last year and I've really regretted it since - it was just a great all-rounder.
I had a mk7 (one with 4 headlights from the late 90's) celica, in my eyes a genuinely beautiful car, amazing driving position, really nice tight gear shift and revvy engine. Moved from that to a 172 cup, felt really cheap and nasty for the first week or two, but honestly I've never driven anything that can match it on a b road. The 202 celica I had was a little softer than the one youre looking at and the 172 a bit harder than the 182, though I wouldn't feel cheated with either, both great cars.
Flood said:
I had a mk7 (one with 4 headlights from the late 90's) celica, in my eyes a genuinely beautiful car, amazing driving position, really nice tight gear shift and revvy engine. Moved from that to a 172 cup, felt really cheap and nasty for the first week or two, but honestly I've never driven anything that can match it on a b road. The 202 celica I had was a little softer than the one youre looking at and the 172 a bit harder than the 182, though I wouldn't feel cheated with either, both great cars.
Small point, but your ST202 was a Mk6. The latest shape Celicas (like the T-Sport mentioned in the OP) are the Mk7s.Slightly bigger point. Your old celica was also 4wd, the new one is fwd.
On fuel you'll find the Clio to be much better, You can still get 30mpg if you thrash the clio everywhere, 35 and up is possible if your an average joe driver and you'll hear alot of claims of nearly 40 on motorway cruises, for a 2 litre petrol hot hatch its very economical.
The celica will drink fuel alot more purely because to get the performance out of it, like a vtec engine, your ragging the balls of it all the time which of course = more revs = more fuel consumption. If your an enthusiastic driver you won't be seeing north of 30mpg. Thats not to say the clio doesn't need ragging to get the most from it, but it has some low down power, the celica is as i said earlier, nothing nothing nothing LIFT and change gear.
"Lift" as its known on the toyota's is their version of VTEC, it works in a very similar way and has very similar results, you won't hear of anyone who use's their civic type r's properly getting near 30mpg either.
AHA! i hear you say, but the celica has 6 gears so will definately be much better! Right?!..
The celica also has the most pointless 6th gear ever created. It may aswell not be there, IIRC it drops the revs by about 150 (yes, 150, not 1500) its utterly useless.
The only thing imo that the celica has going for it over the clio is the build quality, but even thats not perfect. Don't get an earlier celica, they suffered from oil leaks and gearbox failures often, quite a few people over on TOC had engine blowups aswell, the later ones don't have the same issues. At least the clios problems just tend to be your average s
t build quality of rattly panels, exhausts rusting off and dodgy lambda sensors.
On fuel you'll find the Clio to be much better, You can still get 30mpg if you thrash the clio everywhere, 35 and up is possible if your an average joe driver and you'll hear alot of claims of nearly 40 on motorway cruises, for a 2 litre petrol hot hatch its very economical.
The celica will drink fuel alot more purely because to get the performance out of it, like a vtec engine, your ragging the balls of it all the time which of course = more revs = more fuel consumption. If your an enthusiastic driver you won't be seeing north of 30mpg. Thats not to say the clio doesn't need ragging to get the most from it, but it has some low down power, the celica is as i said earlier, nothing nothing nothing LIFT and change gear.
"Lift" as its known on the toyota's is their version of VTEC, it works in a very similar way and has very similar results, you won't hear of anyone who use's their civic type r's properly getting near 30mpg either.
AHA! i hear you say, but the celica has 6 gears so will definately be much better! Right?!..
The celica also has the most pointless 6th gear ever created. It may aswell not be there, IIRC it drops the revs by about 150 (yes, 150, not 1500) its utterly useless.
The only thing imo that the celica has going for it over the clio is the build quality, but even thats not perfect. Don't get an earlier celica, they suffered from oil leaks and gearbox failures often, quite a few people over on TOC had engine blowups aswell, the later ones don't have the same issues. At least the clios problems just tend to be your average s
t build quality of rattly panels, exhausts rusting off and dodgy lambda sensors.Edited by tyranical on Monday 19th July 23:29
Have to agree with fuel economoy there. I got an indicated 44mpg (fourty four!) from my 172 by doing a steady 70 on the motorway over 160 miles at the weekend. It's a bit out, about 40mpg in reality. I see 37mpg on my daily commute (3 miles out of town, 1 mile dual carriageway, 6 miles winding A road, 1 mile into town) and I get that by driving fairly normally, a bit of 5k RPM here and there but not pushing really hard.
tyranical said:
Slightly bigger point. Your old celica was also 4wd, the new one is fwd.
On fuel you'll find the Clio to be much better, You can still get 30mpg if you thrash the clio everywhere, 35 and up is possible if your an average joe driver and you'll hear alot of claims of nearly 40 on motorway cruises, for a 2 litre petrol hot hatch its very economical.
The celica will drink fuel alot more purely because to get the performance out of it, like a vtec engine, your ragging the balls of it all the time which of course = more revs = more fuel consumption. If your an enthusiastic driver you won't be seeing north of 30mpg. Thats not to say the clio doesn't need ragging to get the most from it, but it has some low down power, the celica is as i said earlier, nothing nothing nothing LIFT and change gear.
"Lift" as its known on the toyota's is their version of VTEC, it works in a very similar way and has very similar results, you won't hear of anyone who use's their civic type r's properly getting near 30mpg either.
AHA! i hear you say, but the celica has 6 gears so will definately be much better! Right?!..
The celica also has the most pointless 6th gear ever created. It may aswell not be there, IIRC it drops the revs by about 150 (yes, 150, not 1500) its utterly useless.
The only thing imo that the celica has going for it over the clio is the build quality, but even thats not perfect. Don't get an earlier celica, they suffered from oil leaks and gearbox failures often, quite a few people over on TOC had engine blowups aswell, the later ones don't have the same issues. At least the clios problems just tend to be your average st build quality of rattly panels, exhausts rusting off and dodgy lambda sensors.
thanks mate, il keep it all in mind. Hoping for a couple of test drives over this weekend coming. So I'll see what's what. I've got my eye on another dc2 import too which is the same money as a celica but it's a 1996.On fuel you'll find the Clio to be much better, You can still get 30mpg if you thrash the clio everywhere, 35 and up is possible if your an average joe driver and you'll hear alot of claims of nearly 40 on motorway cruises, for a 2 litre petrol hot hatch its very economical.
The celica will drink fuel alot more purely because to get the performance out of it, like a vtec engine, your ragging the balls of it all the time which of course = more revs = more fuel consumption. If your an enthusiastic driver you won't be seeing north of 30mpg. Thats not to say the clio doesn't need ragging to get the most from it, but it has some low down power, the celica is as i said earlier, nothing nothing nothing LIFT and change gear.
"Lift" as its known on the toyota's is their version of VTEC, it works in a very similar way and has very similar results, you won't hear of anyone who use's their civic type r's properly getting near 30mpg either.
AHA! i hear you say, but the celica has 6 gears so will definately be much better! Right?!..
The celica also has the most pointless 6th gear ever created. It may aswell not be there, IIRC it drops the revs by about 150 (yes, 150, not 1500) its utterly useless.
The only thing imo that the celica has going for it over the clio is the build quality, but even thats not perfect. Don't get an earlier celica, they suffered from oil leaks and gearbox failures often, quite a few people over on TOC had engine blowups aswell, the later ones don't have the same issues. At least the clios problems just tend to be your average s
t build quality of rattly panels, exhausts rusting off and dodgy lambda sensors.Edited by tyranical on Monday 19th July 23:29
Saxaboom said:
tyranical said:
Slightly bigger point. Your old celica was also 4wd, the new one is fwd.
On fuel you'll find the Clio to be much better, You can still get 30mpg if you thrash the clio everywhere, 35 and up is possible if your an average joe driver and you'll hear alot of claims of nearly 40 on motorway cruises, for a 2 litre petrol hot hatch its very economical.
The celica will drink fuel alot more purely because to get the performance out of it, like a vtec engine, your ragging the balls of it all the time which of course = more revs = more fuel consumption. If your an enthusiastic driver you won't be seeing north of 30mpg. Thats not to say the clio doesn't need ragging to get the most from it, but it has some low down power, the celica is as i said earlier, nothing nothing nothing LIFT and change gear.
"Lift" as its known on the toyota's is their version of VTEC, it works in a very similar way and has very similar results, you won't hear of anyone who use's their civic type r's properly getting near 30mpg either.
AHA! i hear you say, but the celica has 6 gears so will definately be much better! Right?!..
The celica also has the most pointless 6th gear ever created. It may aswell not be there, IIRC it drops the revs by about 150 (yes, 150, not 1500) its utterly useless.
The only thing imo that the celica has going for it over the clio is the build quality, but even thats not perfect. Don't get an earlier celica, they suffered from oil leaks and gearbox failures often, quite a few people over on TOC had engine blowups aswell, the later ones don't have the same issues. At least the clios problems just tend to be your average st build quality of rattly panels, exhausts rusting off and dodgy lambda sensors.
thanks mate, il keep it all in mind. Hoping for a couple of test drives over this weekend coming. So I'll see what's what. I've got my eye on another dc2 import too which is the same money as a celica but it's a 1996.On fuel you'll find the Clio to be much better, You can still get 30mpg if you thrash the clio everywhere, 35 and up is possible if your an average joe driver and you'll hear alot of claims of nearly 40 on motorway cruises, for a 2 litre petrol hot hatch its very economical.
The celica will drink fuel alot more purely because to get the performance out of it, like a vtec engine, your ragging the balls of it all the time which of course = more revs = more fuel consumption. If your an enthusiastic driver you won't be seeing north of 30mpg. Thats not to say the clio doesn't need ragging to get the most from it, but it has some low down power, the celica is as i said earlier, nothing nothing nothing LIFT and change gear.
"Lift" as its known on the toyota's is their version of VTEC, it works in a very similar way and has very similar results, you won't hear of anyone who use's their civic type r's properly getting near 30mpg either.
AHA! i hear you say, but the celica has 6 gears so will definately be much better! Right?!..
The celica also has the most pointless 6th gear ever created. It may aswell not be there, IIRC it drops the revs by about 150 (yes, 150, not 1500) its utterly useless.
The only thing imo that the celica has going for it over the clio is the build quality, but even thats not perfect. Don't get an earlier celica, they suffered from oil leaks and gearbox failures often, quite a few people over on TOC had engine blowups aswell, the later ones don't have the same issues. At least the clios problems just tend to be your average s
t build quality of rattly panels, exhausts rusting off and dodgy lambda sensors.Edited by tyranical on Monday 19th July 23:29
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff