Thinking of going from a Clio 172 to an Ignis Sport..
Discussion
Hi folks
I am thinking of making this change. My current 172 is on 162500 miles and is nearly ready to be taken to the big racetrack in the sky. I think I need something cheaper and more reliable to run- also my knee is taking a battering from the clio's heavy clutch and it's affecting my jogging.
Has anyone made this change before? What would I like about the Ignis and what could I miss about my 172?
I am thinking of making this change. My current 172 is on 162500 miles and is nearly ready to be taken to the big racetrack in the sky. I think I need something cheaper and more reliable to run- also my knee is taking a battering from the clio's heavy clutch and it's affecting my jogging.
Has anyone made this change before? What would I like about the Ignis and what could I miss about my 172?
DomJeans said:
Hi folks
I am thinking of making this change. My current 172 is on 162500 miles and is nearly ready to be taken to the big racetrack in the sky. I think I need something cheaper and more reliable to run- also my knee is taking a battering from the clio's heavy clutch and it's affecting my jogging.
Has anyone made this change before? What would I like about the Ignis and what could I miss about my 172?
Would you consider the Suzuki Swift Sport instead. My wife swapped from a 156 V6 (now semi retired seeking weekend work) to a Swift Sport and rarely misses the power and torque of the V6 and revels in its handling and chuckability, its a great drive just missing a 6th Gear for motorway work.I am thinking of making this change. My current 172 is on 162500 miles and is nearly ready to be taken to the big racetrack in the sky. I think I need something cheaper and more reliable to run- also my knee is taking a battering from the clio's heavy clutch and it's affecting my jogging.
Has anyone made this change before? What would I like about the Ignis and what could I miss about my 172?
aarondbs said:
Would you consider the Suzuki Swift Sport instead. My wife swapped from a 156 V6 (now semi retired seeking weekend work) to a Swift Sport and rarely misses the power and torque of the V6 and revels in its handling and chuckability, its a great drive just missing a 6th Gear for motorway work.
I think they are a bit out of my price range- I don't want to spend more than 1.5 k or so....aarondbs said:
Yes, I have stumbled across that good review before. Nice reading. What I am trying to do is find someone with experience of 172/182 and Ignis Sports so they can give me an objective comparison.You are in luck!
I had a new 172 Cup in 2002 & now have a low mileage 2005 Ignis Sport (for sale incidentally!) as a second car.
They are similar in some ways, both being fairly basic and neither particularly comfortable. Clio obviously has more power & feels a good chunk faster - also has the edge in handling. That said, the Ignis has modest wheels & tyres by modern standards (meaning cheap to replace, I managed to get Toyo T1Rs for around £80 a corner) & I think the performance available suits the grip levels very well, it's a good car in which to attack a back road & the (bespoke?) engine likes to rev. I also love the gear ratios, particularly going from 2nd to 3rd, it's clearly not geared for 0-60 times but instead to keep the motor buzzing on typical NSL roads, not sure if this was due to the motorsport side of it or not. Suzuki also has ABS & A/C which the 172 didn't.
Driving position in the Suzuki is way better, although the gearchance is not quite as good as the Clios. More practical than you might think mind, it's a small car on the outside but still takes my mountain bike easily & the back seats fold flat, no awkward lip to get over. Note that the Ignis runs on 98 Octane fuel (or better) & gets around 250 miles on a tank.
Can't comment on insurance as I'm that bit older now but for reference it's costing me around £200/year.
Hope this helps.
I had a new 172 Cup in 2002 & now have a low mileage 2005 Ignis Sport (for sale incidentally!) as a second car.
They are similar in some ways, both being fairly basic and neither particularly comfortable. Clio obviously has more power & feels a good chunk faster - also has the edge in handling. That said, the Ignis has modest wheels & tyres by modern standards (meaning cheap to replace, I managed to get Toyo T1Rs for around £80 a corner) & I think the performance available suits the grip levels very well, it's a good car in which to attack a back road & the (bespoke?) engine likes to rev. I also love the gear ratios, particularly going from 2nd to 3rd, it's clearly not geared for 0-60 times but instead to keep the motor buzzing on typical NSL roads, not sure if this was due to the motorsport side of it or not. Suzuki also has ABS & A/C which the 172 didn't.
Driving position in the Suzuki is way better, although the gearchance is not quite as good as the Clios. More practical than you might think mind, it's a small car on the outside but still takes my mountain bike easily & the back seats fold flat, no awkward lip to get over. Note that the Ignis runs on 98 Octane fuel (or better) & gets around 250 miles on a tank.
Can't comment on insurance as I'm that bit older now but for reference it's costing me around £200/year.
Hope this helps.
Hi Polrules, I appreciate you taking the time to respond. Thanks! How is the clutch compared to the 172? My left knee is a bit dodgy now (age and running don't help) and the heavy clio clutch is taking its toll. I think I am mostly worried about having a slower car, although I think an Ignis Sport will likely as fun to drive.
Interestingly, I had a quote to swap my clio insurance for the Ignis and it will cost me £50 more per year than the clio making it around £430 or so (I use it for work and do 30,000 miles a year or so). That's admiral multicar policies for you.
Interestingly, I had a quote to swap my clio insurance for the Ignis and it will cost me £50 more per year than the clio making it around £430 or so (I use it for work and do 30,000 miles a year or so). That's admiral multicar policies for you.
Polrules said:
You are in luck!
I had a new 172 Cup in 2002 & now have a low mileage 2005 Ignis Sport (for sale incidentally!) as a second car.
They are similar in some ways, both being fairly basic and neither particularly comfortable. Clio obviously has more power & feels a good chunk faster - also has the edge in handling. That said, the Ignis has modest wheels & tyres by modern standards (meaning cheap to replace, I managed to get Toyo T1Rs for around £80 a corner) & I think the performance available suits the grip levels very well, it's a good car in which to attack a back road & the (bespoke?) engine likes to rev. I also love the gear ratios, particularly going from 2nd to 3rd, it's clearly not geared for 0-60 times but instead to keep the motor buzzing on typical NSL roads, not sure if this was due to the motorsport side of it or not. Suzuki also has ABS & A/C which the 172 didn't.
Driving position in the Suzuki is way better, although the gearchance is not quite as good as the Clios. More practical than you might think mind, it's a small car on the outside but still takes my mountain bike easily & the back seats fold flat, no awkward lip to get over. Note that the Ignis runs on 98 Octane fuel (or better) & gets around 250 miles on a tank.
Can't comment on insurance as I'm that bit older now but for reference it's costing me around £200/year.
Hope this helps.
I had a new 172 Cup in 2002 & now have a low mileage 2005 Ignis Sport (for sale incidentally!) as a second car.
They are similar in some ways, both being fairly basic and neither particularly comfortable. Clio obviously has more power & feels a good chunk faster - also has the edge in handling. That said, the Ignis has modest wheels & tyres by modern standards (meaning cheap to replace, I managed to get Toyo T1Rs for around £80 a corner) & I think the performance available suits the grip levels very well, it's a good car in which to attack a back road & the (bespoke?) engine likes to rev. I also love the gear ratios, particularly going from 2nd to 3rd, it's clearly not geared for 0-60 times but instead to keep the motor buzzing on typical NSL roads, not sure if this was due to the motorsport side of it or not. Suzuki also has ABS & A/C which the 172 didn't.
Driving position in the Suzuki is way better, although the gearchance is not quite as good as the Clios. More practical than you might think mind, it's a small car on the outside but still takes my mountain bike easily & the back seats fold flat, no awkward lip to get over. Note that the Ignis runs on 98 Octane fuel (or better) & gets around 250 miles on a tank.
Can't comment on insurance as I'm that bit older now but for reference it's costing me around £200/year.
Hope this helps.
Never driven either car but seriously looked into ignis sports before the little one was born. Seem to get great reviews from owners and appealed to me as a sports car that could be driven hard and have fun in with out having to be too worried about loosing your license.
A good alternative would probably be a 1.7 puma. Similar as light weight, revy and chuck able. Find one free of rot and budget for a brake upgrade. Did 30k mainly motorway miles in mine and loved it. Should be plenty in budget to choose from.
A good alternative would probably be a 1.7 puma. Similar as light weight, revy and chuck able. Find one free of rot and budget for a brake upgrade. Did 30k mainly motorway miles in mine and loved it. Should be plenty in budget to choose from.
p.s. how much is your Ignis going for? Is it advertised on here?
Polrules said:
You are in luck!
I had a new 172 Cup in 2002 & now have a low mileage 2005 Ignis Sport (for sale incidentally!) as a second car.
They are similar in some ways, both being fairly basic and neither particularly comfortable. Clio obviously has more power & feels a good chunk faster - also has the edge in handling. That said, the Ignis has modest wheels & tyres by modern standards (meaning cheap to replace, I managed to get Toyo T1Rs for around £80 a corner) & I think the performance available suits the grip levels very well, it's a good car in which to attack a back road & the (bespoke?) engine likes to rev. I also love the gear ratios, particularly going from 2nd to 3rd, it's clearly not geared for 0-60 times but instead to keep the motor buzzing on typical NSL roads, not sure if this was due to the motorsport side of it or not. Suzuki also has ABS & A/C which the 172 didn't.
Driving position in the Suzuki is way better, although the gearchance is not quite as good as the Clios. More practical than you might think mind, it's a small car on the outside but still takes my mountain bike easily & the back seats fold flat, no awkward lip to get over. Note that the Ignis runs on 98 Octane fuel (or better) & gets around 250 miles on a tank.
Can't comment on insurance as I'm that bit older now but for reference it's costing me around £200/year.
Hope this helps.
I had a new 172 Cup in 2002 & now have a low mileage 2005 Ignis Sport (for sale incidentally!) as a second car.
They are similar in some ways, both being fairly basic and neither particularly comfortable. Clio obviously has more power & feels a good chunk faster - also has the edge in handling. That said, the Ignis has modest wheels & tyres by modern standards (meaning cheap to replace, I managed to get Toyo T1Rs for around £80 a corner) & I think the performance available suits the grip levels very well, it's a good car in which to attack a back road & the (bespoke?) engine likes to rev. I also love the gear ratios, particularly going from 2nd to 3rd, it's clearly not geared for 0-60 times but instead to keep the motor buzzing on typical NSL roads, not sure if this was due to the motorsport side of it or not. Suzuki also has ABS & A/C which the 172 didn't.
Driving position in the Suzuki is way better, although the gearchance is not quite as good as the Clios. More practical than you might think mind, it's a small car on the outside but still takes my mountain bike easily & the back seats fold flat, no awkward lip to get over. Note that the Ignis runs on 98 Octane fuel (or better) & gets around 250 miles on a tank.
Can't comment on insurance as I'm that bit older now but for reference it's costing me around £200/year.
Hope this helps.
:0) Yeah, on the Cliosport forum, you find quite a few people that have gone from the Ignis Sport to Clio, but not that many going the other way. I thought I would find a more objective response here also (and I did!)- the cliosport forum users are clearly nuts for the clios and thus may be biased.
MrBig said:
And there was me just thinking "he's never going find someone who's driven both of those cars" 
Shows: A) What I know! and B) What a broad church Pistonheads is!
Shows: A) What I know! and B) What a broad church Pistonheads is!
GenePoolReject13 said:
Never driven either car but seriously looked into ignis sports before the little one was born. Seem to get great reviews from owners and appealed to me as a sports car that could be driven hard and have fun in with out having to be too worried about loosing your license.
A good alternative would probably be a 1.7 puma. Similar as light weight, revy and chuck able. Find one free of rot and budget for a brake upgrade. Did 30k mainly motorway miles in mine and loved it. Should be plenty in budget to choose from.
Don't fancy a puma, not a fan of the looks although I have never driven one.A good alternative would probably be a 1.7 puma. Similar as light weight, revy and chuck able. Find one free of rot and budget for a brake upgrade. Did 30k mainly motorway miles in mine and loved it. Should be plenty in budget to choose from.
I rallied one in the 2004 London to Sydney Marathon & got there winning the class.
OK the owner rolled it on the last day, but no way was it "Top heavy" we had a wheel in a ditch & it hit a b****y big rock that encouraged a one & a half roll, so we ended up on the roof!
Great car, very underrated
OK the owner rolled it on the last day, but no way was it "Top heavy" we had a wheel in a ditch & it hit a b****y big rock that encouraged a one & a half roll, so we ended up on the roof!
Great car, very underrated
MrBig said:
And there was me just thinking "he's never going find someone who's driven both of those cars"
Shows: A) What I know! and B) What a broad church Pistonheads is!
Seems like a popular change.Shows: A) What I know! and B) What a broad church Pistonheads is!
DomJeans said:
Hi Polrules, I appreciate you taking the time to respond. Thanks! How is the clutch compared to the 172? My left knee is a bit dodgy now (age and running don't help) and the heavy clio clutch is taking its toll. I think I am mostly worried about having a slower car, although I think an Ignis Sport will likely as fun to drive.
Interestingly, I had a quote to swap my clio insurance for the Ignis and it will cost me £50 more per year than the clio making it around £430 or so (I use it for work and do 30,000 miles a year or so). That's admiral multicar policies.
No trouble at all. The controls in the Ignis are light but the clutch engagement is sharp, low speed manouvering can be jerky until you adjust. In common with the Clio all controls have a very satisfying (& sadly becoming rare) mechanical feel.Interestingly, I had a quote to swap my clio insurance for the Ignis and it will cost me £50 more per year than the clio making it around £430 or so (I use it for work and do 30,000 miles a year or so). That's admiral multicar policies.
Regards my car, you may want to have a look in the classifieds, seems to be in budget.
david.h said:
I rallied one in the 2004 London to Sydney Marathon & got there winning the class.
OK the owner rolled it on the last day, but no way was it "Top heavy" we had a wheel in a ditch & it hit a b****y big rock that encouraged a one & a half roll, so we ended up on the roof!
Great car, very underrated
Awesome! I bet you had a great time. :0)OK the owner rolled it on the last day, but no way was it "Top heavy" we had a wheel in a ditch & it hit a b****y big rock that encouraged a one & a half roll, so we ended up on the roof!
Great car, very underrated
Thanks again- that's good to hear. I will take a look!
Regards my car, you may want to have a look in the classifieds, seems to be in budget.
Polrules said:
DomJeans said:
Hi Polrules, I appreciate you taking the time to respond. Thanks! How is the clutch compared to the 172? My left knee is a bit dodgy now (age and running don't help) and the heavy clio clutch is taking its toll. I think I am mostly worried about having a slower car, although I think an Ignis Sport will likely as fun to drive.
Interestingly, I had a quote to swap my clio insurance for the Ignis and it will cost me £50 more per year than the clio making it around £430 or so (I use it for work and do 30,000 miles a year or so). That's admiral multicar policies.
No trouble at all. The controls in the Ignis are light but the clutch engagement is sharp, low speed manouvering can be jerky until you adjust. In common with the Clio all controls have a very satisfying (& sadly becoming rare) mechanical feel.Interestingly, I had a quote to swap my clio insurance for the Ignis and it will cost me £50 more per year than the clio making it around £430 or so (I use it for work and do 30,000 miles a year or so). That's admiral multicar policies.
Regards my car, you may want to have a look in the classifieds, seems to be in budget.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff