Can't decide between a Clio Sport 182 & Audi TT 225!

[MG42Maniac]

Hey,

Some of you might remember my thread about the 350z and RWD a while back. Well I decided against spending that much money on a car not because I cannot afford to but rather because I believe the money would be better spent on my IT career (Qualifications & MS Training) and I want a new TV in my room plus I want to reinvest some cash.

Anyway after deducting the above and some others off my budget I am left with about £7.5k to spend on a car excluding insurance.

I have been looking for a while now checking owners clubs and searching loads on here and have narrowed it down to 2 possible cars. £ 7.5k would buy me:

2005 Clio 182 with cup packs and a fair bit money spare
2000ish Audi TT 225 with leftovers for a remap to 265bhp/280lb-ft

I know these cars are different but for some reason I really like them both! As I said earlier I have done a fair amount of research and came to the following conclusions (feel free to correct me if I am talking rubbish)

Build Quality:
Audi is superior and should be more reliable but will be much more expensive when it breaks. Clio's have problems but are normally cheap to fix.

Performance:
At stock they are pretty much neck and neck with the Audi having the edge slightly on long straights. When remapped the Audi is a much stronger performer. If I am honest I prefer straight line speed to taking corners fast and I am assuming the turbo will give much greater sense of accelerating? Both handle really well but my current car handles very well as well so I doubt I will really push the car so see its true potential. I think I would prefer being pinned into my seat on a 0-100 run in the Audi than hammering it around back roads in the Clio but I have done neither so I am only going but what I think I would like.

Equipment:
Surprisingly the Clio seems to be much better spec'd than the Audi. Thing is I don't know if I would really use things like Auto Wipers/Lights & Cruise but It might turn out to be very useful. The Audio controls on the Clio which the Audi lacks would be very handy.

Running costs:
As for fuel a major plus about the Clio is the fact you can 'drive it like you stole it' and it will see very good MPG, try that with the Audi and your looking at sub 20MPG. I do about 800miles a month or 10k a year so MPG is fairly important but not so much that I would seriously consider a 265BHP Turbo car I drive from Southampton to Lymington each day so a mixture of 50% town and 50% NSL and from what I can gather a remapped TT should give ~30MPG and a Clio ~35MPG. Both need Super unleaded so its all about how much they drink.

Audi tyres seem to be ~£100 but are good for 15-20k which is quite a long time and not a major factor if they last that long. Clios are cheaper at ~£65 but unsure of how long they will last. Both need servicing pretty much every year and the Clio is quite a bit cheaper.

Tuning:
Clio can be remapped for minimal gains but to improve the low down grunt. There are some nice sounding exhausts available. KTEC Racing a major Renault tuning company is a 30 min drive away so thats very handy.
Audi can be chipped for huge gains but not a very nice sounding car. That is are far as I'd take mods to be honest.

So that's pretty much how I see each car but I am stuck on which one to buy. I am coming from a Saxo VTR so both will feel like the Burj Al Arab inside and feel like rocket ships. One thing I do like about the Saxo though is its ultra low running costs.

At the end of the day I am leaning towards the Clio for its cheapness, equipment and low running costs but then I like the Audi for its brute power, looks and Audi quality.

Help me OCUK!

p.s Sorry for long post

 

[Howard]

You'll see very low 20s from a 182 if you give it some welly as well. You don't buy these types of cars for economy

 

[MG42Maniac]

You'll see very low 20s from a 182 if you give it some welly as well. You don't buy these types of cars for economy

Thanks for ultra quick reply!

I know neither of them are doing to give me ultra good MPG but I don't want silly MPG on my daily runs like 24MPG which a high powered Jap turbo would give me hence why I am not looking at them. I would like to see it capable of 30MPG on day to day driving

 

[MarkDavis]

They're completely different cars.

Drive them.

Then it will be as clear as day which one you prefer.

If you're trying to do some sort of misguided analysis on the difference in cost of tyres between them, you're looking at completely the wrong sort of cars.

 

[[TW]Fox]

There is little we can offer you in this thread. MarkDavis has totally summed it up, they are utterly different cars.

If you think the difference between 24 and 30mpg matters and you worry about tyre costs then buy the Clio.

 

[Howard]

Thanks for ultra quick reply!

I know neither of them are doing to give me ultra good MPG but I don't want silly MPG on my daily runs like 24MPG which a high powered Jap turbo would give me hence why I am not looking at them. I would like to see it capable of 30MPG on day to day driving

Depends how you drive. If you drive gently when commuting you'll see about 30-33MPG from the Clio. Less from the Audi because of it's rather inefficient, yet smaller, engine

The Clio will be far more involving to drive, too. The TT more of a cruiser. Depends what you want really

 

[Richdog]

You'll see very low 20s from a 182 if you give it some welly as well. You don't buy these types of cars for economy

I don't think you'll see low 20's from a 182 long-term as an average... if you drive it like a loon regularly you will see around 32 at least when you factor in that even when driving a car hard regularly it still accounts for a relatively small part of the time you spend going slow in it on daily runs.

My 182 averages 35-36mpg (i'm going completely off of the trip comuter which is generally reset every 3 refills) and that is giving it some nice little canings when I get the chance. If I drove it gently ALL the time, barely revved it, and used plenty of cruise control i would be looking at maybe 5mpg or so more. But then you may as well sell it and buy a Micra.

 

[MG42Maniac]

They're completely different cars.

Drive them.

Then it will be as clear as day which one you prefer.

If you're trying to do some sort of misguided analysis on the difference in cost of tyres between them, you're looking at completely the wrong sort of cars.

I plan to do a few test drives in the next few weeks. Problem is all the TT's around here are at dealers and overpriced and I don't reckon I could get a test drive in a £12k TT which I had no intention of buying because it was overpriced. I think they would suss me out quickly.

The tyres is a minor point I just wanted to compare running costs. If I drive both the Clio and the Audi and I am torn between the two then the lower running costs of the Clio might come into play.

There is little we can offer you in this thread. MarkDavis has totally summed it up, they are utterly different cars.

If you think the difference between 24 and 30mpg matters and you worry about tyre costs then buy the Clio.

The difference between 24 MPG and 30 MPG would be about £35 a month so its a small point but one to consider. Its the fact that fuel will always rise, I don't want to buy something that will drink petrol when its always going to rise that would be negligence on my part I feel. I'd quite like a car which I could cane for fun and ignore the sub 20 MPG and then drive it sensibly and return 30+ MPG - that would be ideal!

Depends how you drive. If you drive gently when commuting you'll see about 30-33MPG from the Clio. Less from the Audi because of it's rather inefficient, yet smaller, engine

The Clio will be far more involving to drive, too. The TT more of a cruiser. Depends what you want really

That petrol consumption is fine I would not have a problem with that. I guess the problem I have is that I don't know what I want! I want something in-between i guess.

 

[Howard]

From a 2L engine 36mpg is fairly impressive. I cannot beat 33MPG in my Accord even when driving it like miss Daisy!

 

[[TW]Fox]

The difference between 24 MPG and 30 MPG would be about £35 a month so its a small point but one to consider.

If its a point worthy of consideration then the Clio is the car for you, not the TT. You don't run a car like the TT on a shoestrong budget, £35 is nothing compared to some of the bills it might throw at you. It sounds like you'd be worried about whatever bills are around the corner - especially if 'I wanted a new TV' put you off a 350Z.

Buy the Clio. It will be a more enjoyable ownership experience for you.

 

[Sparky]

Depends how you drive. If you drive gently when commuting you'll see about 30-33MPG from the Clio. Less from the Audi because of it's rather inefficient, yet smaller, engine

The Clio will be far more involving to drive, too. The TT more of a cruiser. Depends what you want really

Try closer to 40 mpg mate.

 

[chris.tarry85]

If its a point worthy of consideration then the Clio is the car for you, not the TT. You don't run a car like the TT on a shoestrong budget, £35 is nothing compared to some of the bills it might throw at you. It sounds like you'd be worried about whatever bills are around the corner - especially if 'I wanted a new TV' put you off a 350Z.

Buy the Clio. It will be a more enjoyable ownership experience for you.

Exactly, even if you know the right people a TT still is nowhere near cheap to run, and if you try and cut corners to save costs then it will come back and bite you in a BIG way!

 

[melchy]

Although the Renaultsport Clio's may be reasonable on fuel, I wouldn't say that either servicing or parts are all that reasonable. I wouldn't buy one thinking that they will be cheap to run as when something breaks or needs replacing (and it will) you'll find that costs are higher than you'd imagine for a small French hatchback.

A set of rear disks for example are £170.
32K and 72K (5 year) services are not cheap either due to belt changes.

 

[Richdog]

Cambelt = £600 on average too.

 

[MG42Maniac]

If its a point worthy of consideration then the Clio is the car for you, not the TT. You don't run a car like the TT on a shoestrong budget, £35 is nothing compared to some of the bills it might throw at you. It sounds like you'd be worried about whatever bills are around the corner - especially if 'I wanted a new TV' put you off a 350Z.

Buy the Clio. It will be a more enjoyable ownership experience for you.

I've not got a 'shoestring' budget its just what I am used to. For example in nearly 2 years of having owned my Saxo it has cost me ~£100 due to things breaking. This is the only car I have ever owned so to me this is normal running costs, I know this is a massively deranged view as no performance car has running costs this low and I am prepared to pay higher running costs but I don't want to keep shelling out £300 here and £200 there when things so wrong that's all I am saying

I don't mind paying to maintain a car if I am getting lots of enjoyment out of it but I have limits. If the Clio will give me almost as much fun as the TT but cost half as much to keep running then thats a strong win for the Clio.

Exactly, even if you know the right people a TT still is nowhere near cheap to run, and if you try and cut corners to save costs then it will come back and bite you in a BIG way!

I am aware they are not cheap to run I am just looking to find out from people if the extra costs in running are worth it over the Clio. With either cars I would not cut corners, I would commit to the car I just don't want to commit to something and have it constantly break down.

Although the Renaultsport Clio's may be reasonable on fuel, I wouldn't say that either servicing or parts are all that reasonable. I wouldn't buy one thinking that they will be cheap to run as when something breaks or needs replacing (and it will) you'll find that costs are higher than you'd imagine for a small French hatchback.

A set of rear disks for example are £170.
32K and 72K (5 year) services are not cheap either due to belt changes.

I looked at the consumable prices for the Clio and figured them to be okay and lets be honest something like the Discs don't need replacing that often.

Cambelt = £600 on average too.

I'd buy one that just had it done recently or if it was coming up I would reflect this in my offer. I probably won't own the car for more than 2 or 3 years so it should be be an issue.


In regards to the 350z is was not the running costs but the actual price of the Car. I think they are simply awesome cars and I would happily bare a few large bills for one, much more so than the other two cars. The ones I was looking at were ~£14k which for me is a lot of money especially when Cars is not my only expensive hobby so I could not justify spending that much money on a car. I can't see a 350z being twice as much fun as a Clio 182 so thats why I thought the i'd lower my expectations and splash out on some other stuff instead of just a car.

 

[EddScott]

Buy the TT, you'll go home with the girl.

Buy the 182, you'll go home with a 4 pack, a curry and a blue movie.

The choice is yours

 

[melchy]

Just as an example, my 182's rear disks and pads need replaced shortly. Labour on top of that will see it costing £300 at least. My Aircon is a bit flakey (common fault) and this usually results in dash out to replace the broken part, £500 - £600 i believe due to the labour involved. To top that off its due its 5 year service in June next year. So theoretically if I was to replace my rear disks/pads, have the aircon fixed and get the 5 year service the car will cost me around £1300 - £1500 between now and June and thats as long as it doesn't need anything else fixing during that timescale. Obviously it will be cheaper if you weren't to use Renault or could do a lot of the work yourself.

 

[DB_SamX]

Build Quality:
Audi is superior and should be more reliable but will be much more expensive when it breaks. Clio's have problems but are normally cheap to fix.

http://reliabilityindex.co.uk/search_results.html?apc=3128339010848601
http://reliabilityindex.co.uk/search_results.html?apc=3128339010848601

If the reliability index compiled by Warranty Direct is good to go by, Clios will be more reliable in general and be cheaper to fix. How the 182 in particular fares is unknown. This new list has been in most papers today.

 

[Ev0]

Echo the comments about Clio servicing and parts, they aren't that cheap, but still not terrible for the fun you get out of them.

Yes the rear discs are £160, but that's because they come complete with bearings pressed in. If you're on a tighter budget you can can third party discs that don't have them cheaper and ge yours pressed out/in.

 

[Richdog]

I had a major service when I bought mine but the git didn't do the cambelt, just the aux belt.

However besides some very minor warning light indicator issues (1 in 100 or so starts the ABS light etc comes on, engine restart turns them off) it's been solid as a rock.