Clio Cup versus 106 GTi & Saxo VTS
Discussion
I have an issue of Autocar magazine from April 2003 which has a 'Best Driver's Car under £15k' feature. They raced around Rockingham race circuit, which is 1.7 miles long. However, the biggest suprise for me was the fact that the Renualt Clio Cup was only 0.83 seconds faster than the 106 GTi, and just 0.52 seconds faster than the Saxo VTS, despite having a colossal 52bhp more than both of them, as well as a lot more torque.
So my questions are these:
Do any PHers know why it is the times are so close, despite the significant power differences? Does this mean the 106 and Saxo are, in fact, (dare I say it) more talented than the Clio, despite being older designs? And thus do they represent a better used hot hatch buy, being much cheaper to buy than the Clio these days?
Thanks in advance for your opinions/advice!
So my questions are these:
Do any PHers know why it is the times are so close, despite the significant power differences? Does this mean the 106 and Saxo are, in fact, (dare I say it) more talented than the Clio, despite being older designs? And thus do they represent a better used hot hatch buy, being much cheaper to buy than the Clio these days?
Thanks in advance for your opinions/advice!
Mrcarfan832 said:
I have an issue of Autocar magazine from April 2003 which has a 'Best Driver's Car under £15k' feature. They raced around Rockingham race circuit, which is 1.7 miles long. However, the biggest suprise for me was the fact that the Renualt Clio Cup was only 0.83 seconds faster than the 106 GTi, and just 0.52 seconds faster than the Saxo VTS, despite having a colossal 52bhp more than both of them, as well as a lot more torque.
So my questions are these:
Do any PHers know why it is the times are so close, despite the significant power differences? Does this mean the 106 and Saxo are, in fact, (dare I say it) more talented than the Clio, despite being older designs? And thus do they represent a better used hot hatch buy, being much cheaper to buy than the Clio these days?
Thanks in advance for your opinions/advice!
I'd say weight.So my questions are these:
Do any PHers know why it is the times are so close, despite the significant power differences? Does this mean the 106 and Saxo are, in fact, (dare I say it) more talented than the Clio, despite being older designs? And thus do they represent a better used hot hatch buy, being much cheaper to buy than the Clio these days?
Thanks in advance for your opinions/advice!
Have you seen the prices of good (i.e, not chavved-up) 106 GTi's? They hold their value very well, people are happy to pay 'big' money for what they are. The Saxo on the other hand is dirt-cheap. The Clio is sort of middle-ground in price. I love my 172 Cup, such a capable car, but I haven't driven either of the others.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff


