RE: Renault Clio Williams: Spotted

RE: Renault Clio Williams: Spotted

Tuesday 12th March

Renault Clio Williams: Spotted

The Clio Williams is as PH as they come - and this early one is a stunning example of the breed



This being PistonHeads, a fast Clio of some sort is never more than a few days away from grabbing attention during a deep dive into the classifieds. In fact, it was only last month that an early Mk2 was the subject of our affection, it being a phase one 172 that was on sale (and apparently still is) for just £5,500. But today, our retinas have been drawn to the tinier profile of a Mk1 Clio, one of just four currently listed in holy grail Williams spec. Hot hatches don’t come more PH than this.

As many PHers will remember, the Williams is from a time when hot hatches were small but had motors so comparably large that they took up all of the engine bay. In many cases, rudimentary servicing required a damn-near engine removal due to the restricted space on offer. So imagine the horror on the faces of Renault specialists when the car to follow the Clio 16v, which looked well-endowed with its 1.8-litre engine, was followed by the Williams. Shoehorned into the front of its 3.7-metre frame was an F7R engine of 2.0-litre capacity. That was enough to make it a Top Trumps hero, when it came to hot hatches, anyway.


It was a peach of an engine, as well, producing 150hp at 6,100rpm, and while 129lb ft of torque at 4,500rpm doesn’t sound like much, the grunt stayed around for long enough to make it stronger than the stat suggests. It was fun too because this was a four-cylinder to be revved. With only 990kg to carry, it could sprint the Williams from zero to 62mph in 7.7 seconds – today’s hot hatches are barely a second quicker to the mark, impressive for a now 26-year-old model. That it was buzzy and, when you worked it, growled through the intake made it all the more fun to operate.

In truth, the engine set the agenda for those that went into following fast Clios all the way up to the previous, non-turbo 200. Drive a 200 Cup and you really can feel the relation in the way in which they both pull. Although the Williams’ 2.0-litre (and the early 172 one) held an advantage thanks to its use of a throttle cable. Owners who’ve experienced them breaking might yearn for fly by wire technology while waiting roadside for the AA, but the instantaneous reaction of a direct connection between foot and valve is so very satisfying.


Of course, the responsive engine was matched by a lovely, willing chassis. The Williams was conceived for Group N rally homologation and developed with the then dominant Williams F1 team, using the base of the already impressive ‘Valver’, so Renault would have had to really mess things up for it not to work. But the Williams still managed to surpass what was thought possible in this category, it managing to be as hilarious as rivals and, when asked to be, more serious and of a higher capability. The motorsport link was clearest in this regard.

These were the days before electronic safety systems were fitted to cars – even ABS wasn’t added until the Williams 2 – so driving one of these Sport Blue Clios quickly required full concentration. The step from grip to oversteer could be a rapid one, so much so that cars in ill health today can feel downright scary to drive at pace. But with a good set of tyres, healthy suspension and smart driver behind the wheel, the Williams was a superb machine to thread along a route. The sort that will happily lift an inside rear wheel to help you tighten the line. Or spit you off if you get greedy.


Let’s be frank, in 2019 a Mk1 Clio is miniscule, its A-pillars look like pencils and there’s barely a couple of inches between the inside of the door cards and the outside world. Unlike later Clios, the Mk1 is not a car most people could live with on a daily basis. Although it’s highly unlikely that a Williams will ever be subjected to such a task, what with them slowly creeping up in value and becoming a collector’s favourite.

We could have chosen the 13,000-mile-old Williams that fits the bill for just that as our Spotted, but we’ve opted for a higher mileage car, because it’s nice to think that perhaps, this one might stay in more regular use with its next owner. With 112,000 miles on the clock it’s not exactly lunar miles, but for a car as specialist as this, it’s certainly well used. Judging by the condition of the paintwork, gold Speedlines and the interior, however, that’s not to say it hasn’t been loved.


As its chassis number – 039 – suggests, this is an early Williams 1, one of only 51currently registered in Britain. It’s been dry stored for years and not seen use on a rainy day for a long time. Actually, it’s recently had a big overhaul, with only 400 miles under its belt since the body, engine and consumables were freshened up. The seller has the receipts for everything to back the claim up.

So what’s the reason for the sale? The ad poster explains: “I’m in the process of buying a Porsche 964. I’m a true car enthusiast.”

Someone go snap their arm off.

SPECIFICATIONS - RENAULT CLIO WILLIAMS

Engine: 1,998cc 4-cyl
Transmission: 5-speed manual, front-wheel drive
Power (hp): 150@6,100rpm
Torque (lb ft): 129@4,500rpm
MPG: 34.9
Price new: £13,275
Yours for: £15,250

Click here to see the full ad.

Author
Discussion

dukebox9reg

Original Poster:

1,249 posts

87 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
Having had a mk1 megane with the F7R that open filter won't be doing the engine power and running any favours.

Had a friend many moons ago who had one of these turbo's and charge cooled by bb tuning I think it was. Mental little car.

Only thing that would put me off is my Megane at 125k got an engine issue where 3 renault specialists and a couple of back street garages couldn't pin down so got rid. Basically the idle one second would be fine, then it would hunt, be fine again for 10 mins then would rev and hold at 4k, then hunt again then repeat.

Julian Thompson

724 posts

177 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
Takes me back to 1992 when I had a clio 16v. I was very young and the poor thing got hacked about something rotten. Big wheels, big exhaust, massive audio and all the usual jazz. I do think the 5 turbo is more iconic though. I had one of those at the same time (although it was a race car) and there was something about that which was orders of magnitude more quirky and alive.

Also, both cars eat second gear synchro for fun. I got good at changing gearboxes after Renault warranty stopped on the clio!

Thornaby

257 posts

8 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
I loved this era of Clio's. The RSi's, 16v's and the Williams being the top of the tree one of my dream cars at 14 years old. You cant justify £15k on it now though.

JP.Racing

32 posts

6 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
Julian Thompson said:
Takes me back to 1992 when I had a clio 16v. I was very young and the poor thing got hacked about something rotten. Big wheels, big exhaust, massive audio and all the usual jazz. I do think the 5 turbo is more iconic though. I had one of those at the same time (although it was a race car) and there was something about that which was orders of magnitude more quirky and alive.

Also, both cars eat second gear synchro for fun. I got good at changing gearboxes after Renault warranty stopped on the clio!
Ha ha, I had the baby Williams (1.8 16v) and went the other way. Took a car someone has molested with body kit and overly loud exhaust and put it back to 'normal'. Loved that car, but it always needed work doing to it.

Frimley111R

9,409 posts

173 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
Looks nice. I had one a few years ago. Time has seriously moved on, it's no more than a nippy hatchback compared to modern cars. It generated more interest in the drive than my Evora though! A bit of a novelty for me tbh.


Advertisement

wab172uk

1,222 posts

166 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
Thornaby said:
I loved this era of Clio's. The RSi's, 16v's and the Williams being the top of the tree one of my dream cars at 14 years old. You cant justify £15k on it now though.
Yeah, I always wanted a 16v. I enquired about one of the last run off cars sat in my local dealer's showroom. Only they decided to add a few grand to the asking price and wouldn't budge.

As for not justifying it? To anyone on an average wage, I'd agree. But to someone earning a decent amount, this could be a spur of the moment `recapture my youth` car for what to them is a small amount of money.

is1

141 posts

87 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
For that sort of money, I'd expect the wheels to have the polished lip (i.e. to have been refurbed correctly).
Also, I don't believe the Williams F1 team at the time had any engineering input - it was just "badge engineering".
You could spend a third of this on an immaculate 172 Cup - probably the most special of all the Clios - Trophy included.

daytona111r

385 posts

143 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
I had a one - enduring memory was just how many liberties you could take with it, just loved being thrown around and on the limit it was more like a plateau than on a knife edge (Evo’s words not mine). Still one Of the most fun cars I’ve driven.

Turbobanana

1,253 posts

140 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
PH said:
Unlike later Clios, the Mk1 is not a car most people could live with on a daily basis.
Why not?

wab172uk

1,222 posts

166 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
is1 said:
For that sort of money, I'd expect the wheels to have the polished lip (i.e. to have been refurbed correctly).
Also, I don't believe the Williams F1 team at the time had any engineering input - it was just "badge engineering".
[b]You could spend a third of this on an immaculate 172 Cup - probably the most special of all the Clios - Trophy included[b/].
You are kidding right?

A 172 cup is more special than a Trophy?
A 172 cup is more special than a Williams?

Al the 172 cup was, was a 172 without a few toys and lacked ABS. Hardly as special as a Trophy or a Williams.

thiscocks

1,903 posts

134 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
Turbobanana said:
PH said:
Unlike later Clios, the Mk1 is not a car most people could live with on a daily basis.
Why not?
Exactly what I thought confused

DSC OFF

10 posts

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
wab172uk said:
You are kidding right?

A 172 cup is more special than a Trophy?
A 172 cup is more special than a Williams?

Al the 172 cup was, was a 172 without a few toys and lacked ABS. Hardly as special as a Trophy or a Williams.
Personally I wouldn't say its more special but as the trophy keeps climbing into wiliams territory I think the 172 cup will follow in its wake. Grab one now while you can

is1

141 posts

87 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
wab172uk said:
You are kidding right?

A 172 cup is more special than a Trophy?
A 172 cup is more special than a Williams?

Al the 172 cup was, was a 172 without a few toys and lacked ABS. Hardly as special as a Trophy or a Williams.
No, I'm not kidding.
Perhaps "special" was a poor choice of word as it means different things to different people. Certainly as an affordable driver's hot hatch, the 172 Cup is the one.
No doubt the Williams is more iconic and the Trophy had a plaque on the seat base (I know Clios well, and have had a Trophy) and Sachs dampers which seem to cause the owners "damper anxiety" (but was otherwise a 182 Cup).

The 172 Cup had lighter thinner glass, no ABS, strengthened hubs, lighter wheels with a different offset etc.
I believe it also lapped evo magazine's test track quicker than a Trophy, although I accept there are many variables that can affect that.

George Smiley

1,143 posts

20 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
I had my first crash in one of these - some lad at work bought one and took us out for a spirited test drive. 3 wheel cornering and spankinging down the Runcorn bypass when he got one of the driven wheels onto the loose gravel on the barrier area. Que instant loss of traction which resulted in several spins wiping the car out completely. His total time of ownership was approx. 2 hours from Garage to recovery truck.

Fortunately for me this was when whiplash claims had just been launched so I got a nice packet but my neck was never the same.

Davie

2,472 posts

154 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
Weirdly, having never seen one of these for years if not decades... I passed one in East Lothian a couple of weeks ago. There is just something so cool about these and to an extent, the equally scare Clio 16V of that era too. Slightly staggered by the asking price but tis the way most 90's performance models have gone lately. Missed the boat, again.

woots787

125 posts

88 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
Totally disagree that the step to oversteer can be rapid, probably the friendliest car at the limit I've ever driven. Loved mine.

woots787

125 posts

88 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
is1 said:
Also, I don't believe the Williams F1 team at the time had any engineering input - it was just "badge engineering".
bit anecdotal but a friend did work experience at williams in the early 90s. He knew I had one and said they had told him that williams had a 16v for a while and made suggestions including an extra skin on the front subframe. Pretty specific knowledge if making it up. Cup is another nice renault, I looked at them new for £13k but bought a £4k williams instead. For me homologation was more special than windscreen thickness!

The_Ox

99 posts

166 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
Takes me back to my old Williams (no. 87). The last time I drove that, I'd also been driving around in a 4.0L Chimaera for a while but the Williams still absolutely impressed with both how it went and how it handled. Plus, with that tiny bonnet, it was so easy to drive. An awesome car.

si_xsi

895 posts

134 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
Admittedly not kept an eye on values of these for a while, but £15k!! Wow. Think i'd rather spend less and opt for a Pug 106 1.6 XSI or Rallye and have just as much fun driving it as the Williams.

sdiggle

71 posts

29 months

Tuesday 12th March
quotequote all
112k...No thank you. I had many friends scrapping Clio's with that mileage on back in the day. Engine expired!