Clio Renaultsport 200
Discussion
Jasey@ said:
If you are going to use as daily driver on commute in typical busy town - Get something else !
I dont understand this comment.I mean, if you were talking about something like a mk1 MX5 or Elise, then I could kind of understand it, but a Mk3 Clio? I've never had one, but I have had a mk2 182 and if anything it was too refined for my tastes; I can't imagine how a mk3 is any worse in that respect. Unless you're talking about fuel economy, but even then, anything semi interesting aint going to do too well around town.
TameRacingDriver said:
Jasey@ said:
If you are going to use as daily driver on commute in typical busy town - Get something else !
I dont understand this comment.I mean, if you were talking about something like a mk1 MX5 or Elise, then I could kind of understand it, but a Mk3 Clio? I've never had one, but I have had a mk2 182 and if anything it was too refined for my tastes; I can't imagine how a mk3 is any worse in that respect. Unless you're talking about fuel economy, but even then, anything semi interesting aint going to do too well around town.
Harsh ride (especially the cup), clunky gear change, no grunt low down.
Driving round town is horrible.
Blasting down a b-road leaving it in 3rd the car comes alive
.If you aren't concentrating on driving the 200 you start to notice how poor the rest of the package really is.
Mastodon2 said:
That was my thought - happy to be proven wrong but it is a very small wing. I know it doesn't take much wing area to make a big difference to downforce but it's not exactly a Sierra Cosworth-esque wing in consideration here. Aside from that, it's hardly a low or particularly aerodynamically efficient car either, so I think the inefficiencies in other areas of the bodywork would cancel out whatever the wing could add. I can believe the diffuser does diffuse some air (again, how much difference a diffuser makes on a hot hatch is an interesting topic) but I don't think adding the spoiler would really make a big difference to cornering speed, even on track - just my opinion though, would be good to see a real test of the two setups back to back.
I think perhaps fine-tuning of the suspension would get more gains by helping the car keep it's tyres in contact with the road more and prevent the rear end from lifting off over bumps in the first place.
Doesn't the bottom of a Car need to be flat (like an F1 car) to work with a diffuser to produce real down force? I'm not to hot on Aero I think perhaps fine-tuning of the suspension would get more gains by helping the car keep it's tyres in contact with the road more and prevent the rear end from lifting off over bumps in the first place.
.Flanders. said:
annodomini2 said:
Basically the diffuser relies on the ride height of the rear of the car to work properly, if you change the ride height its effectiveness drops off quite dramatically.
This is fine on a nice smooth track, but on our bumpy b-roads and pushing hard you lose your rear downforce. Which is the last thing you need when taking a corner at speed!
This is a problem as the downforce is also pulling the rear of the car down slightly, so as it raises over the bump, the downforce reduces, the car raises and increases the problem.
If you plan on doing spirited b-road driving either get one with a spoiler (their a factory option) or fit one.
A Renault Clio producing downforce?This is fine on a nice smooth track, but on our bumpy b-roads and pushing hard you lose your rear downforce. Which is the last thing you need when taking a corner at speed!
This is a problem as the downforce is also pulling the rear of the car down slightly, so as it raises over the bump, the downforce reduces, the car raises and increases the problem.
If you plan on doing spirited b-road driving either get one with a spoiler (their a factory option) or fit one.
ks.There's been a whole load of nonsense spouted on this thread so far!
I ran a full fat 200 with the cup chassis for a year until circumstances forced me to get rid last summer.
Absolutely fantastic car.
Handling really is excellent, steering arguably lacks a bit of feel but it is such a joy to drive.
You could call it a bit heavy, and the engine does only really come alive above 5k rpm, but for such a highly tuned NA 16v (claimed 100bhp/litre, but don't plan on putting it on a rolling road if you like to brag) it's rather torquey.
Actually quite refined (at least the full fat one, can't speak for the cup); it's quite short-geared so at motorway speeds the engine is a bit buzzy, but I'd just turn the radio up a notch or two and cruise quite happily all day. The standard seats are fine, Recaros slightly better perhaps but standard versions were comfortable all day long, and decent lateral support too.
Balls to the suggestion that the ride is harsh—it is hard, but apart from at quite low speeds the damping is just so good that it rides very well indeed. Supple is the word.
And as for needing a spoiler to maintain downforce on B-roads?
If you're going for the halfords look then fine, but you'd have to drive like an absolute mug to get it to spin off into a hedge!
OP: I'd get between 15mpg (town) and 35mpg (with a very light foot on A roads).
And I lost £3500 in depreciation in the first year, so a real shame I had to sell it.
I ran a full fat 200 with the cup chassis for a year until circumstances forced me to get rid last summer.
Absolutely fantastic car.
Handling really is excellent, steering arguably lacks a bit of feel but it is such a joy to drive.
You could call it a bit heavy, and the engine does only really come alive above 5k rpm, but for such a highly tuned NA 16v (claimed 100bhp/litre, but don't plan on putting it on a rolling road if you like to brag) it's rather torquey.
Actually quite refined (at least the full fat one, can't speak for the cup); it's quite short-geared so at motorway speeds the engine is a bit buzzy, but I'd just turn the radio up a notch or two and cruise quite happily all day. The standard seats are fine, Recaros slightly better perhaps but standard versions were comfortable all day long, and decent lateral support too.
Balls to the suggestion that the ride is harsh—it is hard, but apart from at quite low speeds the damping is just so good that it rides very well indeed. Supple is the word.
And as for needing a spoiler to maintain downforce on B-roads?
If you're going for the halfords look then fine, but you'd have to drive like an absolute mug to get it to spin off into a hedge!OP: I'd get between 15mpg (town) and 35mpg (with a very light foot on A roads).
And I lost £3500 in depreciation in the first year, so a real shame I had to sell it.
Thanks to everyone for the replies.
I drove one yesterday. RS200 with Cup chassis, recaro's and some other bits.
First impressions were OK although I must say it didn't feel all that fast. And yes I did drive it properly and rev it. The "change up" bleep on nearing the redline was annoying.
Handling was good and it a felt like more of the old school hot hatch (ie it felt small and nimble). I've owned a Civic Type R (FN2) and Ford Focus ST and both felt big and lardy in comparison. On that count the Renault is a winner.
Build quality seemed good and certainly on a par with Ford although the car I drove had only covered 1500 miles.
The interior was a bit spartan but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing on this type of car. There are still enough toys on board.
I liked the car I drove. Pearlescent white with black speedlines.
Sadly the dealer was a bit of a tit and wants more than the car is worth so the search continues.
I drove one yesterday. RS200 with Cup chassis, recaro's and some other bits.
First impressions were OK although I must say it didn't feel all that fast. And yes I did drive it properly and rev it. The "change up" bleep on nearing the redline was annoying.
Handling was good and it a felt like more of the old school hot hatch (ie it felt small and nimble). I've owned a Civic Type R (FN2) and Ford Focus ST and both felt big and lardy in comparison. On that count the Renault is a winner.
Build quality seemed good and certainly on a par with Ford although the car I drove had only covered 1500 miles.
The interior was a bit spartan but I don't necessarily see that as a bad thing on this type of car. There are still enough toys on board.
I liked the car I drove. Pearlescent white with black speedlines.
Sadly the dealer was a bit of a tit and wants more than the car is worth so the search continues.
Edited by Red 4 on Sunday 25th March 22:56
Flanders. said:
Doesn't the bottom of a Car need to be flat (like an F1 car) to work with a diffuser to produce real down force? I'm not to hot on Aero .
Yes, the large variations in the underside of the car would cause a lot of eddys that would swirl the air, preventing it from being accelerated under the car and creating the pressure differential that causes the car to be sucked towards the ground..Here is a car that produces some downforce
and here is one that doesn't (spoiler or not!)
I'm not saying that spoilers on road cars have no effect, particularly when they are designed and placed with some consideration, nor am I saying that diffusers you see on some hot hatches these days don't do anything - they will clearly diffuse some air, but nothing that is going to stick you to the road!
It's French; it is cheap and nasty and it'll fall apart.
Ok, so now the clichés are out of the way...
I've owned a range of sport/performance cars: Focus RS, Westfield Cosworth, Leon Cupra R, 2 Audi S3s, RS6 etc. Plenty of decent(ish) cars... I've currently got a 911 Turbo as a toy/weekend/occasion car. I also have a Clio RS200 Cup as the daily runner.
My thoughts?
Inside, it's far from a Bentley. It's basic. That is being kind! But I once read a good online article comparing it to the RS Porsches (google it, think it was MSN cars!). Ok, it doesn't go as far as having the pull chord handles but it has limited gadgets: no aircon, no cruise etc. A cd player, gear change bleep/light and electric windows is as hi-tech as it gets.
Does this lack of gadgetry or creature comforts bother me? Well, each to their own. For me, it was more about the driving experience. That's why I wanted one.
So, the drive. Well, it isn't 911 Turbo quick. I graduated from the school of hot-hatches a few years back so I don't consider the Clio that fast. My ownership of fast(er) cars in recent years has redefined my opinion of speed.
Yes, it's nippy. 60 in six or so seconds is quick but it won't be scaring Barry BMW in his rep-mobile diesel down the M6 late one evening. You have to rev the knackers off it.
As all but two of my previous cars have been Turbos, the NA experience was hard to get used to at first but my friend grew up driving in the 80s (incidentally he's just bought a Clio Trophy) and has owned all the older original hot hatch classics. He loved it and said that it embodies the "old school" feeling of thrashing it etc.
If you do drive it hard, the car is rewarding to drive. The harder you push it, the more fun the drive is. Handling is great. If I am honest, I don't think my 911 would be that much quicker on tiny little twisty bits of road. Throw in a straight or put a good driver behind the wheel and it would, of course, be a different outcome.
The Clio is very agile and nimble. Unlike my 911 which reaches criminal speeds very quickly, I can drive this car like I am 18 again and have a ball. It is good fun. Fuel not great (you won't see 30mpg) but its been mechanically reliable and a pleasant enough ownership experience this far.
Hope this helps. From a once anti-French car person.
Ok, so now the clichés are out of the way...
I've owned a range of sport/performance cars: Focus RS, Westfield Cosworth, Leon Cupra R, 2 Audi S3s, RS6 etc. Plenty of decent(ish) cars... I've currently got a 911 Turbo as a toy/weekend/occasion car. I also have a Clio RS200 Cup as the daily runner.
My thoughts?
Inside, it's far from a Bentley. It's basic. That is being kind! But I once read a good online article comparing it to the RS Porsches (google it, think it was MSN cars!). Ok, it doesn't go as far as having the pull chord handles but it has limited gadgets: no aircon, no cruise etc. A cd player, gear change bleep/light and electric windows is as hi-tech as it gets.
Does this lack of gadgetry or creature comforts bother me? Well, each to their own. For me, it was more about the driving experience. That's why I wanted one.
So, the drive. Well, it isn't 911 Turbo quick. I graduated from the school of hot-hatches a few years back so I don't consider the Clio that fast. My ownership of fast(er) cars in recent years has redefined my opinion of speed.
Yes, it's nippy. 60 in six or so seconds is quick but it won't be scaring Barry BMW in his rep-mobile diesel down the M6 late one evening. You have to rev the knackers off it.
As all but two of my previous cars have been Turbos, the NA experience was hard to get used to at first but my friend grew up driving in the 80s (incidentally he's just bought a Clio Trophy) and has owned all the older original hot hatch classics. He loved it and said that it embodies the "old school" feeling of thrashing it etc.
If you do drive it hard, the car is rewarding to drive. The harder you push it, the more fun the drive is. Handling is great. If I am honest, I don't think my 911 would be that much quicker on tiny little twisty bits of road. Throw in a straight or put a good driver behind the wheel and it would, of course, be a different outcome.
The Clio is very agile and nimble. Unlike my 911 which reaches criminal speeds very quickly, I can drive this car like I am 18 again and have a ball. It is good fun. Fuel not great (you won't see 30mpg) but its been mechanically reliable and a pleasant enough ownership experience this far.
Hope this helps. From a once anti-French car person.
I think Chris harris video review at 3.15 or 3.50 min says it all (especially at that price). And normally aspirated enigne is very reliable unlike modern turbos.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3e_mYY7Yr8
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z3e_mYY7Yr8
Mastodon2 said:
Yes, the large variations in the underside of the car would cause a lot of eddys that would swirl the air, preventing it from being accelerated under the car and creating the pressure differential that causes the car to be sucked towards the ground.
...
I'm not saying that spoilers on road cars have no effect, particularly when they are designed and placed with some consideration, nor am I saying that diffusers you see on some hot hatches these days don't do anything - they will clearly diffuse some air, but nothing that is going to stick you to the road!
AFAIK that's usually true, but I believe the clio has some sort of flat tray underneath (look underneath and you can't see very much, it's all covered up) which probably helps with airflow. Stopped stones getting up into my mate's engine bay when he went into the gravel at Donny anyway... Renault claim a few kgs of downforce at 80mph....
I'm not saying that spoilers on road cars have no effect, particularly when they are designed and placed with some consideration, nor am I saying that diffusers you see on some hot hatches these days don't do anything - they will clearly diffuse some air, but nothing that is going to stick you to the road!
I still think it's b
ks that the rear end's going to break traction going over a bumpy b-road from sudden loss of downforce. 
In a groundbreaking first for cars of its class, New Clio Renaultsport boasts a rear air diffuser. Derived from Formula One, this feature has previously only ever been seen on high performance supercars, but now offers Renaultsport fans a taste of ultimate performance.
The diffuser’s purpose is to prevent rear end lift by channelling airflow in such a way that a zone of low pressure is created beneath the car, effectively sucking it to the ground. This eliminates the need for a rear spoiler by producing the equivalent of 40kg of rear downforce at high speed. To maximise the diffuser’s effect, the dual exhausts are housed within the outer channels.
Airflow is also directed by front wing extractor vents, which reduce turbulence and direct air flow along the sides of the car. New Clio Renaultsport comes with a specific bumper and grille, as well as a front aerodynamic splitter to restrict the amount of air passing beneath the car.
The diffuser’s purpose is to prevent rear end lift by channelling airflow in such a way that a zone of low pressure is created beneath the car, effectively sucking it to the ground. This eliminates the need for a rear spoiler by producing the equivalent of 40kg of rear downforce at high speed. To maximise the diffuser’s effect, the dual exhausts are housed within the outer channels.
Airflow is also directed by front wing extractor vents, which reduce turbulence and direct air flow along the sides of the car. New Clio Renaultsport comes with a specific bumper and grille, as well as a front aerodynamic splitter to restrict the amount of air passing beneath the car.
Red 4 said:
Thanks very much for that info, you've answered pretty much everything I asked
Revving the car won't be a problem
I've owned a couple of Honda S2000's and Civic Type R's
Neither will MPG, my Focus ST was averaging 23 MPG
My main concern was build quality. I haven't owned anything French since 1997 when I had a Citroen Saxo VTS which self destructed within about a year. Since then it's been jap or German with a brief forray into Ford ownership.
Thanks again.
I test drove one, while owning a DC5 (non standard admittedly, 250 bhp, Stage 1).Revving the car won't be a problem
I've owned a couple of Honda S2000's and Civic Type R'sNeither will MPG, my Focus ST was averaging 23 MPG
My main concern was build quality. I haven't owned anything French since 1997 when I had a Citroen Saxo VTS which self destructed within about a year. Since then it's been jap or German with a brief forray into Ford ownership.
Thanks again.
I wasn't disappointed with performance, exactly, but a little surprised I suppose. It's not especially quick. Very fun car, though! Would recommend a test drive
ETA: I see you took a test drive and agree with my conclusion!
Oh dear, I’m becoming tempted myself by one of these. Currently have a Fabia vRS SE and have thought about replacing it with something sensible, like a Yeti – for when I’m cycling and watching Rallying. However, I’m not sure what got me looking at them. The Chris Harris review really has tempted me......I must resist.
I think all the OP's questions have been answered pretty well. I've had a 200 with Cup chassis and Recaros for almost a year and while there are faster cars in a straight line, I've never once felt it needed more power. The speed you can carry through bends borders on the ludicrous once you get a feel for the handling, plenty to do very illegal speeds down all but the very worst-sighted and most twisty of B-roads.
As an only car it's a fantastic choice.
As an only car it's a fantastic choice.
Mine is a 2009, 59 plate Nimbus grey with cup pack. Has 11 months tax, warranty until Jan 2013 and has just been serviced in Jan with 12,000 miles on the clock. Low mileage for a car approaching three years old. Part of me is thinking of selling it on, but it is what for. I am far from bored of it, but she fancies a Range Rover or something along those lines. Women!
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff