Clio 200 Cup v Megane 265 Cup - talk to me
Discussion
My daily drive involves a 22 mile stretch of motorway, and a 6 mile urban/rural stretch. I really enjoy seeking out a good B-road at the weekend, but need a car that can cope well with both the daily grind and fun, weekend motoring. I also do the odd track day and like a car that has fast turn-in response, a responsive throttle and an adjustable cornering attitude. I prefer a naturally aspirated engine as I find that even in my current BMW 135i, I get frustrated by a bit of thottle/turbo lag.
Which of these two cars would suit me best given my requirements? I'm thinking Clio - but have heard that the ride on the Cup suspension is absolutely bone shaking......
Which of these two cars would suit me best given my requirements? I'm thinking Clio - but have heard that the ride on the Cup suspension is absolutely bone shaking......
Both Renaults are great cars and will be a blast to drive. However if turbo/throttle lag is an issue with the 135, why would you consider a Megane which being turbocharged would have the same issue (or worse)? The Clio would be better but would feel a bit gutless compared to the 135.
Is your 135 an N54 or N55? I have the 54 in my car and I honestly cant see a problem with it.
Is your 135 an N54 or N55? I have the 54 in my car and I honestly cant see a problem with it.
The ride on the Cup chassis is a bit firm but the handling is excellent, therein lies the trade-off
I wouldn't chose one for long motorway cruises though, they can be a bit buzzy and the exhaust is a bit "boomy"
You also need to rev it hard, it only really comes alive after 5k revs but it is quick if you keep it on the boil
Personally, I'd go for the Full Fat version with cup chassis (I did)
Great car.
I wouldn't chose one for long motorway cruises though, they can be a bit buzzy and the exhaust is a bit "boomy"
You also need to rev it hard, it only really comes alive after 5k revs but it is quick if you keep it on the boil
Personally, I'd go for the Full Fat version with cup chassis (I did)
Great car.
dm46 said:
civic type r or r32.
If you think the ride on a Cup chassis Clio is hard then a Type R will irritate you beyond beliefThe suspension on the FN2 is awful (I had one). Absolutely no compliance at all, hit a pothole (or drive over a pebble) and you will know about it
Rear visibility is woeful and it feels like a big car. Good engine and noise though and excellent seats.
dm46 said:
Hoygo said:
Both Clio and Megane are respectively better by a margin than those you mentioned,troll somewhere else.
do you really think so? if so you are an idiot.
ks,PH is full of idiots like you.Buy a Megane 265 with the RS Monitor, have it set in 'Sport' mode with the ESP off and throttle response on Extreme all the time and you'll never worry about throttle response again!
Having driven both Megane and the Clio extensively, I would have the Megane all day, just an absolute animal.
Having driven both Megane and the Clio extensively, I would have the Megane all day, just an absolute animal.
dm46 said:
I have driven them all, I have a vw and a good mate the honda. If you think the french cars are better than the jap/german counterparts then I question your judgement!
Look at depreciation, build quality, jdpower surveys and owners forums and most will agree with me.
Ah yes, Honda reliabilty............like many 2009 Honda S2000's with exploding engines (and some exploding replacement engines), rusty doors and iffy clutches on Civics, etc.Look at depreciation, build quality, jdpower surveys and owners forums and most will agree with me.
A friend bought a brand new Golf once. VW bought it back when it began to fall apart after 3 months.
ruz316 said:
Lol chill out you moody
To the Type R and R32 comments: Not sure you said anything about their performance but i see you are based all in reliability and quality,surely you have a point but nothing can be said if you haven't owned the cars long term,just generalizing doesn't seem fair.
The latest type r (07) has a lot of problems as reported by owners and is not the same as other Honda stuff,driving wise it doesn't feel fast at all,crashy ride and not even close as lively as a clio 172 (nevermind the 200 who is obviously better).
The R32 is a good car (my brother owned one and i've driven quite often),great quality etc and a good motorway cruiser,fast as well,but still in b-roads it is very nose-heavy and understeery and wouldn't see the way the Megane went,even in straight line as i've seen a megane 250 is a bit faster,nevermind of a new 265,good all round car but has not the driving dynamics of a Megane and the fun of it.
As for the OP i said my thought which one to take in French bred forum.
Red 4 said:
dm46 said:
I have driven them all, I have a vw and a good mate the honda. If you think the french cars are better than the jap/german counterparts then I question your judgement!
Look at depreciation, build quality, jdpower surveys and owners forums and most will agree with me.
Ah yes, Honda reliabilty............like many 2009 Honda S2000's with exploding engines (and some exploding replacement engines), rusty doors and iffy clutches on Civics, etc.Look at depreciation, build quality, jdpower surveys and owners forums and most will agree with me.
A friend bought a brand new Golf once. VW bought it back when it began to fall apart after 3 months.
| Rank | Manufacturer |
| 1 | Honda |
| 24 | VW |
| 27 | Renault |
http://www.reliabilityindex.com/manufacturer
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff