4k hot hatch... where would your money go?

[wingman]

Have you owned and driven a corolla t-sport facelift then?

Have you ever owned and driven a hot hatch?

 

[danza]

He's got an FN2 now iirc. Always makes me laugh, the Relentless81 baiting.

 

[wingman]

And I took the bait

OH WELL IT'S NOT LIKE CTR'S ARE REAL HOT HATCHES ANYWAY.

 

[The Running Man]

If someone can suggest a Clio then a corolla is also legit IMO. Still at least they didn't list a 172... or even a walliams..

 

[wingman]

Legit in as much as they've both got four wheels.

Only one of them is a hot hatch.

 

[Firestar_3x]

He did say hot, not mildly warm.

Don't really like quoting 0-60 numbers, but 8.4 seconds to 60?

It clearly isn't a hot hatch, not even close.

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/48797/toyota_corolla_t_sport.html

It's a Honda Civic Type-S Rival (which isn't a hot hatch either) and nothing more.

 

[wingman]

Not to mention the poor handling and vague steering.

 

[Firestar_3x]

Not to mention the poor handling and vague steering.

Yep, a Focus ST170 is quicker and ticks more of the 'hot hatch' boxes, but that isn't a hot hatch either.

 

[-Ad-]

Have you ever owned and driven a hot hatch?

Get something more refined than a Type-R, with 14k and the tone of your post, that's how your thinking looks to me!

I say something boosted.

Actually, what the hell has happened to me: 'Get a DC2, then you can drive a real Type-R'

 

[rjk]

And I took the bait

OH WELL IT'S NOT LIKE CTR'S ARE REAL HOT HATCHES ANYWAY.

 

[peterattheboro]

These Corolla's have 190 brake apparently so they should be quicker than 8 seconds to 60. Guess the are gear ratios are wrong.

Also it looks pants.

I'm going to say LCR again as it's the best choice

Clio will be too similar to the CTR.

 

[peterattheboro]

R26's are only £1k over budget. Try one of them and save for a bit.

 

[NathWraith]

He did say hot, not mildly warm.

here we go.

isn't it time for you to lease a new diesel

lol

 

[Firestar_3x]

R26's are only £1k over budget. Try one of them and save for a bit.

Only if you buy at the VERY bottom of the market, you need 7k + really.

 

[The Running Man]

Don't really like quoting 0-60 numbers, but 8.4 seconds to 60?

It clearly isn't a hot hatch, not even close.

http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evocarreviews/48797/toyota_corolla_t_sport.html

It's a Honda Civic Type-S Rival (which isn't a hot hatch either) and nothing more.

Stats are wrong but its okay we can overlook this.

Engine, gearbox etc are the same for the celica and corolla and iirc the corolla weighs less and has lower drag co efficient

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-figures/toyota/celica/coupe-1999/

 

[Firestar_3x]

The 5 Door is T-Sport is 40kg more than the Celica?

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-figures/toyota/corolla/hatchback-2002/24184/

Even parkers states the Corolla is 0-60 in 8.1 seconds, so what is the offical number then?

 

[The Running Man]

Official number doesn't matter tbh. Top gear magazine got 7.3 in the wet...

The artificial inflation of the corolla time has often been put down to Toyota wanting to sell more celicas hence fudging the corolla number..

 

[Firestar_3x]

Ah to good old Top Gear mag test, always interested me that one, is that the test in which the CTR was slower to 60 than the T-Sport, as in it took the CTR nearly 8 seconds to reach 60.

Yet the CTR was around 4 seconds quicker 0-120?

Sums up that test me thinks

 

[The Running Man]

Okay all I can do is tell you the parkers number is incorrect.

 

[Janesy B]

isn't it time for you to lease a new diesel

I do enjoy the stench of resentment and contempt within your posts.

Corolla T-Sport may have 190bhp but it looks like a potato and it seems to get pulled apart in reviews/in the opinion of others.