Discussion
hi im a new member to the forum and i just thought i would say hello!& ask my first question??????
Im sure this topic has been done to death so sorry if it has.
Im in the market for a new car at the end of the year, i own a Fiesta Zetec S at the moment and i want to stick with a hatch but i want one a little hotter than my 1.6 beast lol
So what would people choose out of these 2 taking into account of performance, handling, service cost+day to day costs, resale & almost as important as the first reliability???? ive been around all the civic & clio forums but i wanted some unbias veiws.
Thanks in advance Matt
Im sure this topic has been done to death so sorry if it has.
Im in the market for a new car at the end of the year, i own a Fiesta Zetec S at the moment and i want to stick with a hatch but i want one a little hotter than my 1.6 beast lol
So what would people choose out of these 2 taking into account of performance, handling, service cost+day to day costs, resale & almost as important as the first reliability???? ive been around all the civic & clio forums but i wanted some unbias veiws.
Thanks in advance Matt
Matt,
Welcome to the forum. I think that the CTR would be the more rewarding car to drive, and it will, I think hold its value a little better. Plus it's the nearest in the performance stakes with the Focus RS and scooby, so very few cars will 'show you up' on the road. I have heard from other people that the Cleo is ok, but not as hot as others make out, plus the cramped pedal position takes some getting use to.
What about other hot hatches like the Cupra Rs? That looks like a real stormer!
chris
Welcome to the forum. I think that the CTR would be the more rewarding car to drive, and it will, I think hold its value a little better. Plus it's the nearest in the performance stakes with the Focus RS and scooby, so very few cars will 'show you up' on the road. I have heard from other people that the Cleo is ok, but not as hot as others make out, plus the cramped pedal position takes some getting use to.
What about other hot hatches like the Cupra Rs? That looks like a real stormer!
chris
I kind of know what you mean dennis, I traded in my MGF Trophy 160 for a TF160, believeing all the good reports I read and heard about the TF. After living with it for a while, I realised it seemed slower than the car I replaced it with!!Too much hype with new cars methinks! Subsequently, after the hugh underwhelming feeling I got from driving my 'hot' TF160, I traded it in for a 98 Chimaerea 450!! I no longer feel underwhelmed!!!! 
The 172 has great handling - the most mini-like of any current batch of models but suffers from over-stiff suspension and an evil clutch/gear change. You need a strong left leg and left arm before you feel comfortable with it.
The CTR is the more formidable road weapon though. The revvy engine is a delight and the gearchange is rifle-bolt smooth. The suspension is an excellent compromise for the road and the handling remains sharp and responsive. Not quite as sharp as the recent Integra but significantly more practical - always a bonus.
[edit]The cupra is another practical car but (imho) is not as sharp or quick as the CTR. It may be more powerful but acceleration is not as good - the turbo doesn't have half the kick of the CTR's VTEC which just goes to show how good the CTR really is. Don't forget that the Cupra is also a noticibly bigger car too[/edit]
[edit#2]Just want to add that I actually drove all of the above back-to-back with the addition of the MGZR-160 (which was so revulsive that I just wanted to put it straight into a car-crusher), the Pug 206GTi (suprisingly quick and nimble for the engine but still a 206) and an Alfa 147 (wanted to try a GTa but they didn't have any so had to make do with the 2.0l). All this on behalf of a friend who wanted a new (hotish) car - great excuse for abusing all the local showrooms[/edit#2]
>> Edited by jimbro1000 on Thursday 2nd January 20:26
>> Edited by jimbro1000 on Thursday 2nd January 21:08
The CTR is the more formidable road weapon though. The revvy engine is a delight and the gearchange is rifle-bolt smooth. The suspension is an excellent compromise for the road and the handling remains sharp and responsive. Not quite as sharp as the recent Integra but significantly more practical - always a bonus.
[edit]The cupra is another practical car but (imho) is not as sharp or quick as the CTR. It may be more powerful but acceleration is not as good - the turbo doesn't have half the kick of the CTR's VTEC which just goes to show how good the CTR really is. Don't forget that the Cupra is also a noticibly bigger car too[/edit]
[edit#2]Just want to add that I actually drove all of the above back-to-back with the addition of the MGZR-160 (which was so revulsive that I just wanted to put it straight into a car-crusher), the Pug 206GTi (suprisingly quick and nimble for the engine but still a 206) and an Alfa 147 (wanted to try a GTa but they didn't have any so had to make do with the 2.0l). All this on behalf of a friend who wanted a new (hotish) car - great excuse for abusing all the local showrooms[/edit#2]
>> Edited by jimbro1000 on Thursday 2nd January 20:26
>> Edited by jimbro1000 on Thursday 2nd January 21:08
I used to own a 172 but it only lasted 9 months before I traded it in against my current Chimaera... I can't knock the Clio though. It was a very rapid little car which took me and 2 other mates, fully loaded down to Monaco for the Grand Prix in 2001. Managed Calais to the south coast of France in just under 10 hours which was pretty good going!
I have sat in a CTR and it felt like a much more solid car than the 172, which did feel a bit flimsy here and there... Can't comment on how a CTR goes or handles though.
I took my 172 on the track at Brands Hatch and Donnington and it is a real hoot. You can play with it through the corners, easily understeering or inducing a bit of lift off oversteer. Actually, I'm considering swapping my girlfriend's old Polo for a Clio Cup as she loved driving the 172 so much...
I have sat in a CTR and it felt like a much more solid car than the 172, which did feel a bit flimsy here and there... Can't comment on how a CTR goes or handles though.
I took my 172 on the track at Brands Hatch and Donnington and it is a real hoot. You can play with it through the corners, easily understeering or inducing a bit of lift off oversteer. Actually, I'm considering swapping my girlfriend's old Polo for a Clio Cup as she loved driving the 172 so much...
I have just run in my new Clio Cup, now beginning to enjoy it properly... Fantastic car, handles superbly, steers well and is really fast evn by comparison to much more expensive material. I love it!
I didn't consider the CTR cos' it looks like a MPV IMHO, and when you consider that with the price of the Cup there i sno choice to make. That said I don't know what the availability is, no one seems exactly sure how many renault are making!
Twit
I didn't consider the CTR cos' it looks like a MPV IMHO, and when you consider that with the price of the Cup there i sno choice to make. That said I don't know what the availability is, no one seems exactly sure how many renault are making!
Twit
I would have to go with a CTR. My friends Dad had the first one in London and since then I have loved them. His wife actually has a Clio 172 and it doesnt do anything as nice as the CTR. *Except she looks better - sorry Nick!* The CTR is smootehr through the gears and the pick up is so quick when the V-TEC kicks in.
Luckily for me, my mates Dad is selling his CTR in September (my b'day) and he has offered it to me for £12000 with only 25k miles on it - what a bargain! Go with the CTR.
Luckily for me, my mates Dad is selling his CTR in September (my b'day) and he has offered it to me for £12000 with only 25k miles on it - what a bargain! Go with the CTR.
I do like those Cupra R's actually, I tried having a play with one in my Pug a few months back. I stayed with it until I hit about 5000rpm in third, then it started to pull away, I had him on the roundabouts though, but the extra power showed on the straights.
Still, the CTR is quicker and smoother on handling. After 70 it'll kick most Scoobies. I'd still but a CTR? Anyone with me?
Still, the CTR is quicker and smoother on handling. After 70 it'll kick most Scoobies. I'd still but a CTR? Anyone with me?
I will have to keep my Pug tho - Cult Classic. I am only 23 so I will ahve to get limited mileage and then drive it at weekends.... that'll keep the mileage down. I was thinking of buying a brand new CTR but this seems too good a deal to miss.
The only problem is - I still wont have the quickest car out of my friends cus two of them drive Skylines, D'oh!
The only problem is - I still wont have the quickest car out of my friends cus two of them drive Skylines, D'oh!
CTR, but, again, I'm biased. Had a MY00 Scooby for 30k miles before the CTR, it was an excellent car but......in the dry the CTR handles better. You can get a new Scooby for the same money (maybe less) via personally importing one from Holland, I paid 15k OTR for mine, did 30k in a year and a half and only lost couple of grand when trading it for the CTR!!
Haven't driven a 172 but have followed one round several roundabouts (in the CTR) with 1/2 mile straights between, in a straight line the CTR wasn't even trying, on the roundabouts I was expecting the 172 to get away, but it didn't, on one the 172 was oversteering and I was following (faster) without a hint of any over or understeer?!?
The other reason for not going with the 172 (for me) was practicality, the CTR is a bigger car, loads of room in the back and the boot is more than large enough, better built too.
I drove the Cupra, it's good, but not as exciting, it's a rapid Golf/A3, heavier and not as crisp.
The CTR is bigger than you think, someone mentioned that the Cupra is a much bigger car, it's bigger, but not inside and not MUCH bigger overall, it's 4cm longer, 4cm wider and 2cm taller (higher center of gravity) and a fair bit heavier hence the CTR has a P2W ratio of 166bhp/tonne against 155 for the Cupra. Probably doesn't mean much in the real world though.
Just my opinion of course, but, if I was flying it I'd have the Honda any day, much less likely to end up crash landed in some Farmers field.
>> Edited by dougal on Friday 3rd January 11:09
Haven't driven a 172 but have followed one round several roundabouts (in the CTR) with 1/2 mile straights between, in a straight line the CTR wasn't even trying, on the roundabouts I was expecting the 172 to get away, but it didn't, on one the 172 was oversteering and I was following (faster) without a hint of any over or understeer?!?
The other reason for not going with the 172 (for me) was practicality, the CTR is a bigger car, loads of room in the back and the boot is more than large enough, better built too.
I drove the Cupra, it's good, but not as exciting, it's a rapid Golf/A3, heavier and not as crisp.
The CTR is bigger than you think, someone mentioned that the Cupra is a much bigger car, it's bigger, but not inside and not MUCH bigger overall, it's 4cm longer, 4cm wider and 2cm taller (higher center of gravity) and a fair bit heavier hence the CTR has a P2W ratio of 166bhp/tonne against 155 for the Cupra. Probably doesn't mean much in the real world though.
Just my opinion of course, but, if I was flying it I'd have the Honda any day, much less likely to end up crash landed in some Farmers field.
>> Edited by dougal on Friday 3rd January 11:09
Sorry - but my opinion on the Clio Cup is that it is an all out masochists' car. Given that we rarely see the opportunity to *enjoy* our 4-wheeled machinery on an open road and that is the only time you *are* going to enjoy a Clio Cup, I would have to question the sanity of buying such a car unless you are going to get it substantially cheaper than it already is. I don't doubt the performance factor just the physio bills...
Still say the CTR is quicker than the Cupra R - the Seat has more power and torque but that is all it has. The CTR is a slicker, gripier machine that can act like a cute kitten or switch to a deranged lion at a press of the throttle. It is more comfortable to drive and be driven in.
If you can stick with the masochist only formula then I strongly recommend you get an imported 2002 Integra Type-R. The race version can be imported for £12k and costs about £3k to get it into road trim. It's roomier than the CTR, more powerful, better looking, better handling and still £7k cheaper than importing a road-spec equivalent.
Still say the CTR is quicker than the Cupra R - the Seat has more power and torque but that is all it has. The CTR is a slicker, gripier machine that can act like a cute kitten or switch to a deranged lion at a press of the throttle. It is more comfortable to drive and be driven in.
If you can stick with the masochist only formula then I strongly recommend you get an imported 2002 Integra Type-R. The race version can be imported for £12k and costs about £3k to get it into road trim. It's roomier than the CTR, more powerful, better looking, better handling and still £7k cheaper than importing a road-spec equivalent.
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff