Jump to content

clio 182


ArosaScotty
 Share

Recommended Posts

I really can not recommend these cars enough, it will never fail to put a grin on your face.

I had a Clio 172 from new and did 15,000 miles in it. The only thing that went wrong was one of the exhaust brackets. Otherwise it was a perfect car. My ex girfriend bought a Clio 182 Cup which again she had for about 2 years and similar mileage, that had 6,500 on the clock when she bought it and absolutely nothing went wrong with it at all.

Of course I can't say that they are all faultless but Renaultsport models tend to be that bit better put together, they are made in a separate factory to other Renaults and are usually just made to order.

Interior wise, the Cup versions aren't all that. They are designed to be the lighter 'quicker' version although the 182 Cup I drove felt so similar on the road to my Clio 172 you'd be hard pushed unless you drove like a maniac all the time. The interior on the 'full fat' versions is a lot better and you get plenty of toys. Leather/alcantara, auto xenon headlights, auto wipers, cruise control, climate control etc. A very well spec'd car.

If you find a well looked after example, thats been correctly serviced you'll have no problems with it at all. The 2.0ltr engine in these is good for over 100k anyway.

I'd recommend trying to find a Clio 182 with both cup packs, so cup suspension and anthracite wheels, the other pack gives you the cup styling, so front splitter and spoiler I believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 81
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That there a nice car, fun to drive. But. The performance difference between them doesn't justify the insurance and running costs.

Edit: My friend has owned his for 3 years and nothing has neede replacing apart from your standard wear and tear, tyres brakes etc etc. I do think the interior feels cheap though and the diving position is high and hard to get comfortable.

Edited by electricpanda
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lupo GTI is about 128bhp per tonne, the Clio 182 is about 160bhp per tonne. That is quite a difference.

On paper they look quicker and on the road I'd have my money on the Clio as well to be honest. Handline wise I'd imagine they are pretty close, the 182s are extremely well set up though and have been known to keep up with more powerful cars on the bends.

Edited by Alex_225
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That there a nice car, fun to drive. But. The performance difference between them doesn't justify the insurance and running costs.

Edit: My friend has owned his for 3 years and nothing has neede replacing apart from your standard wear and tear, tyres brakes etc etc. I do think the interior feels cheap though and the diving position is high and hard to get comfortable.

once again you are talking bollox.

a 182 gets around the same fuel consumption as a gti if not better. the gti is shocking on fuel for it's size and engine. i'd regularly see between 200-240 miles out of the gti's tank which is rubbish.

the 182 is light years ahead of the gti in performance and handling, and servicing is gonna cost the same if not slightly less.

the only thing that would cost more is insurance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They don't cost you that much to run at all, I used to get a constant 32-34mpg out of mine that was using it accross town as well. You'd be looking at 40mpg+ on a long run.

I jumped from a 1.2 Clio to a the Clio 172 and never noticed a huge step in fuel bills. You'd actually be hard pushed to find a car that is as quick and as efficient on fuel. My Lupo Sport is making more power than standard and only sees 30mpg.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I'm talking **** please don't listen to me.

I've given my opinion of my personal experience with these cars, just because you don't share it, doesn't mean I'm chatting ****.

I remember why I stopped using this forum.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I'm talking **** please don't listen to me.

I've given my opinion of my personal experience with these cars, just because you don't share it, doesn't mean I'm chatting ****.

I remember why I stopped using this forum.

how is your personal opinion more valid then actual facts?

i've given hard facts on performance, and alex has given fuel consumption figures.... but no, your opinion must be right bearing in mind you own neither of the 2 cars :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All your going of is paper, there's no doubt in my mind the Clio is faster in a straight line but it will struggle to

shake a gti down a country road in the "real" world.

Just out of interest have you driven a 182 Cup to be able to compare I mean? Not having a go but just wondered.

I've driven the full version and the Cup versions of these cars and to be honest he amount of grip and chuckability these have is pretty unbeatable. Now from what I can tell on paper but even if they were level pegged on the corners, the Clio would still be the quicker car.

The Lupo GTI is wicked in its own right, there's no doubt but if its performance and handling you want the Clio 182 is the one to go for.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How do I not own a lupo? :S

All your going of is paper, there's no doubt in my mind the Clio is faster in a straight line but it will struggle to

shake a gti down a country road in the "real" world.

ok, you own a gti, i didn't realise that, but i have run both my lupo gti and a 182 back to back, and when i sold my gti my decision was down to a 182 or an ibiza cupra. i had a 182 on loan from a friend for a week, and the 182 is in a different league to a gti. a gti handles like **** compared to a clio, if you think otherwise then you are mistaken. even a gti on coilovers (and yes mine was) comes nowhere close to a standard clio.

i really can't be arsed to go on with this, you have blinkers on and they obviously need removing before you'll be willing to come to terms with the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not sure if it's the cup or the normal 182. All I know is his came with anthricite wheels and he's put a different exhaust.

I really enjoyed driving it, it has a big grin factor however I could see that wearing off after a few weeks. Plus I'm not that big, about 6foot and I thought it feels like a very high driving position.

There an extremely compitant car for the money but doesn't have the same appeal to me as my lupo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest LupoJoe
I don't have blinkers! I very very nearly bought a 182 but after owning a gti and driving a 182 I'm glad I made the choice I made.

I dont see how you can even think theyre in the same league performance wise, making hot hatches is renaults speciality, vw dont make quick cars and since the mk2 have never impressed with an overall package as theyre too obsessed with making things heavy and reliable and giving it 'just enough' power. Renault concentrate so much on performance, the 182 trophys have susspension worth 4k, (yes it is 4k to buy) as they have remote resivoir dampers, yes a lupo gti is a nippy little shopping cart and a nice well built warm hatch, but there is a vast difference between it and a 182. My dads anhiolates my lupo in all areas. The variable valve timing gives an awsome kick on the 182's aswell when you hit 5.5k it literaly changes note similar to a vtec engine, yet the 182 has lots of torque low down.

every magazine say its the benchmark mid sized hot hatch that took over from the 106gti and its still the best today even with the new clio 197 and now clio 200. Theres a video of a clio 200 done by performance car mag on youtube of a focus rs being harrased around millbrook by a clio 200, because the clio handels so well and the ford is a barge it cant shake it off, even with its 300bhp

Edited by LupoJoe
Link to comment
Share on other sites

to be fair i genuinely cant see why we are going on about lupo gtis as at no point has scottyarosa said he wanted one!! :lol:

i dont think you can buy a standard car thats not too old thats as much fun as a 182 for 6k.

what kind of mileage do you do? ive heard many vaying reliabilty reports on 182's. seems theres an even split of good ones and bad ones. but then any car has its niggles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I LOVE how everyone says Renault make lightweight hatches and VW make heavy barges.

Mk2 Clio 172 weighs 1110kgs.

Mk3 Golf VR6 "Barge" weighs 1180kgs.

Considering that these Renaults also seem to be made out of what appears to be paper, it makes me wonder how they actually managed to make them so heavy?

I've driven a 182, and tbh... I would rather save my money and buy a Saxo VTS or 106 GTi. Screwed together better and just as fun in my experience.

Although, Megane 225's are depreciating really well... very interesting option. I like them, especially now all the chavs round here seem to have crashed theirs (one sold his out of embarrassment - nothing to do with a certain black G40 :ph34r: ).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

to be fair i genuinely cant see why we are going on about lupo gtis as at no point has scottyarosa said he wanted one!! :lol:

i dont think you can buy a standard car thats not too old thats as much fun as a 182 for 6k.

what kind of mileage do you do? ive heard many vaying reliabilty reports on 182's. seems theres an even split of good ones and bad ones. but then any car has its niggles.

i considered the lupo gti a long time ago, but if i'm honest i think it came down to it being not as quick as its rivals, and the price you have to pay for the badge.

the reliability on the clio is a good point, although i dont do alot of miles a day, maybe 10-12 tops.

i suppose another reason why i'm swaying for the clio is the guy i go to if the arosa breaks is a french vechile specialist, so i doubt if it was to break there would be much he hasnt seen. even found out the other day his son drives one :lol:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Its the power to weight not the power, a lorry produces 550bhp but theyre slow because theyre heavy. st170 focus's would get eaten alive by 182's

Did i mention anything about the st170? i said focus rs which produces about 215bhp which from personal exerience would eat a 182 alive. Having owned a 172 myself i understand the big appeal for the cars but the insurance is way too much!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did i mention anything about the st170? i said focus rs which produces about 215bhp which from personal exerience would eat a 182 alive. Having owned a 172 myself i understand the big appeal for the cars but the insurance is way too much!

I have a mate with an RS Focus, and have tested the performance of my Civic against it a few times (when both were standard, as its now 330bhp and dusts me), and every time my car has been a little faster.

Now my cars book 0-60 figure is 6.6 seconds and the clios is 6.7 so id say in a race they would be very even, and down to driver skill. The dif on the RS can be an arse as-well, on certain roads even with the massive power advantage I am much faster point to point as the power is unusable with the amount of squirm. Though coilovers and a thicker rear arb do give a slight advantage :D.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did i mention anything about the st170? i said focus rs which produces about 215bhp which from personal exerience would eat a 182 alive. Having owned a 172 myself i understand the big appeal for the cars but the insurance is way too much!

the ST170 was only brought up because i could'nt find any RS's like you suggested that were in the same price range as the clio. i thought you might have made a mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a mate with an RS Focus, and have tested the performance of my Civic against it a few times (when both were standard, as its now 330bhp and dusts me), and every time my car has been a little faster.

Now my cars book 0-60 figure is 6.6 seconds and the clios is 6.7 so id say in a race they would be very even, and down to driver skill. The dif on the RS can be an arse as-well, on certain roads even with the massive power advantage I am much faster point to point as the power is unusable with the amount of squirm. Though coilovers and a thicker rear arb do give a slight advantage :D.

Focus RS shouldn't be losing out to a CTR. FRS's have regularly hit the ton in about 15-15.5 seconds, whereas CTR's are closer to 17 seconds. Thats in a straight line too - though the gears I expect the far greater torque of the FRS to really put some distance down.

Either your mates FRS isn't quite on par, or yours is really healthy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And why are we banging on about LupoGTi and Renault 182? Its got way more power, of course its going to be alot quicker :lol: Not only that, but VW have totally different design philosophies to Renault, totally different aims.

A Lupo GTi's strength isn't in its B-road performance, or in its sprint. Its the quality of it - the interior, the build quailty, the materials, the little touches like chrome lifters, filters on the filler bottles. I'm pretty sure you will NEVER see another small car built to that spec ever again, at least not with that much emphasis on overall quality.

In those respects, it poo's over any 182, fancy dampers or not.

Which brings me right around to the point of my arguement - not everyones choice is based entirely on performance. I mean, if that was the case, we'd all be buying the superior Integra Type-R over the Clio 182, wouldn't we? :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.