New Ph2 Clio 172

[Aused]

Just came from an NA MX5, wanting something more modern and a bit more practical. Always knew the RS Clios were a bit special and must say I certainly haven't been dissappointed yet. Great, great engine, nice and torquey with a couple of kicks further up the rev range. Certainly as fast as my former Focus ST225 and handling much more what I want. I have heard a lot of bad things said about them regarding build quality and reliability so am mentally budgeting for that, but at the moment there is no sign at all of these issues. Few photos below, it needs a wash so sorry about that.

Edited by Aused on Thursday 1st July 12:13

[Aused]

rb5230 said:

it is certainly not as fast as a focus st if you had one though (well very close to 60 but after that the focus is in another league), perhaps it just feels it.

rb5230, you have a nice impreza so well done on that. My car history is at the following link where you will see my ST or XR5 as they're called here.

http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...

As for your claims about the focus being "in another league" EVO has the clio 172 cup with 0-60 in 6.5 and the focus 6.7, for 0-100 it is 17.7 for the clio to 16.3 for the focus. Hardly "a different league". As someone who has owned both, i am telling you the clio is as fast as the focus in daily use.

The focus, in my opinion is a one trick pony, great engine no doubt, but outside grand touring duties it was pretty dull. On a twisty road the clio driver would confidently and steadily draw away.

[Aused]

rb5230 said:

Aused said:

rb5230 said:

it is certainly not as fast as a focus st if you had one though (well very close to 60 but after that the focus is in another league), perhaps it just feels it.

As for your claims about the focus being "in another league" EVO has the clio 172 cup with 0-60 in 6.5 and the focus 6.7, for 0-100 it is 17.7 for the clio to 16.3 for the focus. Hardly "a different league". As someone who has owned both, i am telling you the clio is as fast as the focus in daily use.

The focus, in my opinion is a one trick pony, great engine no doubt, but outside grand touring duties it was pretty dull. On a twisty road the clio driver would confidently and steadily draw away.

well like i said to 60 they are very close, then to 100 the focus is drawing a decent lead of a second as you say and as the speed increases the focus just leaves the clio, also in gear acceleration times will show a huge gap in performance. i have played with a friend in his 182 and there is a substantial difference when the speeds get high.

and i actually found the focus very playful for a car of such size with the rear end being very playful, so hardly a 1 trick pony especially considering how much more refined and how much of a nicer place the interior is to be. also on a twisty road the focus was faster than my mates clio down to it being more planted and just obviously more powerful.

i like the renaultsport clios and am not rubbishing them, i was just saying the focus is faster 100% in every road situation than a 182. now on a very small track i think it would be a different matter as the focus is much less set up for track and therefore is softer sprung and much heavier and i think after a couple of laps the brakes would be feeling the heat a bit and a lighter car is much easier to drive on a tight track. now apart from the last bit about track work (as neither of us ended up attending a track day in said cars) this is all just from real world experience of comparing the cars.

I am not rubbishing the ST, it is a good performance car with lots of tuning potential, I used to own one so it impressed me enough at one point to buy one, and I have already said it has a great engine and with the amount of torque a 2.5 litre 5-cylinder turbo engine puts out once on boost, there would be something wrong if the rolling in-gear times weren't in its favour (although i'd be interested in your definition of a "huge gap"). But there is more to it than that. The clio has better steering feel, better change of direction (having owned 2 MX5s, including my last car, I won't be challenged on these points) and better brakes. it also finds far better traction than the focus could. The focus usually just felt heavy, which of course it is.

EVO lap times around Bedford West Circuit have the clio 182 with a time of 1:33.10 with a peak speed of 96mph, the ST has a time of 1:33.90 with a peak of 99mph. The ST has the higher top speed, but its not the deciding factor.

Now i never said the clio was faster than the ST, but I am saying again, as someone who has OWNED both cars, that the clio 172 is AS FAST in real world situations (i.e. not driving straight roads at 120mph or doing 6th gear pulls from 1000rpm) as a focus ST. Comments that the ST "is faster 100% of the time in every road situation" or performance wise they are "not in the same league" just have no basis.

Incidently, I also prefer overall the interior of the clio. I had the full leather recaro interior in my ST and that part was fantastic but I found the rest of it less impressive, more creaky over camber changes and bumps (flexing body?), the plastics average quality (mine was a 2007 LS, the LV is certainly much nicer), the trip computer no where near as good, gearchange not as good (more progressive clutch though), pedals not well spaced or weighted for heel-toe changes (very annoying) and the switch layout less user friendly. The sony stereo was good though and I did like the instrument lighting. The focus was awful on fuel too, where I was lucky to see 11-12L/100km in the focus with general use, the clio easily returns around 8-9L/100km.

All said, I am one happy clio 172 owner, ex focus ST owner.