clio 172s
- Thread starter helpimcrap
- Start date
I'm 23 with 1 ncb and it's £1600 or so i think, no chance at that price.
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Thats ridiciculous, I paid £1200 at 23 with no NCB on my 530 Sport which is a higher group? Shop around.
how good are they really? i see a lot of positive answers on here regarding them bu i've never had one recommended. are they great cars but money pits?
Great cars, but very typically French in their build quality and reliability. Gearboxes are common points of failure and, at around £700 for a refurb unit, aren't a cheap fix. Exhausts are also prone to fail and cost around £300 for a Renault item. Fortunately though, a lot of cars have had the exhaust replaced with a stainless steel item as these can often be cheaper, and won't rot again.
You've also got to put up with general annoying issues such as various rattles from the interior, unidentified noises from around the car and the serv and ABS warning lights appearing when there's nothing wrong.
Get the car on any country road though and it's all worth it. The 172 is quick, extremely chuckable, grips well and has excellent handling for if and when you do get it sideways. It's also comfortable day to day, though I wouldn't purchase one if you're going to be doing a lot of motorway miles. Finally, they're also exceedingly cheap these days.
All in all, if you're willing to put up with the fact that the gearbox could fail on you at any time and the general Frenchness of the car then a 172 is a great buy right now.
The gearbox thing is an odd one, some cars have no problems, many with over 100k on the clock and still running fine with the original box and clutch.
One school of thought is that it's down to the usage, people who have them fail are being too harsh on them, and that's coming from some of the tuners. They are pretty much on the limit for the power/torque the engines produce.
I personally wouldn't worry about the box, you can tell when you test drive if it feels alright or not.
And I know the chap on here always brings up he's on his third, but he rarely mentions that he was also running 230bhp and lots more torque than standard with a turbo
Using mine as a case in point, 94k, I've owned since 33kish, no problems and it's still one of the nicest feeling gear changes I've felt tbh.
One school of thought is that it's down to the usage, people who have them fail are being too harsh on them, and that's coming from some of the tuners. They are pretty much on the limit for the power/torque the engines produce.
I personally wouldn't worry about the box, you can tell when you test drive if it feels alright or not.
And I know the chap on here always brings up he's on his third, but he rarely mentions that he was also running 230bhp and lots more torque than standard with a turbo
Using mine as a case in point, 94k, I've owned since 33kish, no problems and it's still one of the nicest feeling gear changes I've felt tbh.
Mine didn't give any indication that it was going to fail. Was fine one day, the next it started popping out of gear. Then it went all together.
The thing is though, even if it is the usage, it's still pretty poor. A gearbox should be able to cope with a bit of hard use from time to time. Putting an item in that's on the limit of it's capabilities just seems a daft idea.
The gearbox felt fine when I test drove my 172, however a few months later, as said above, it just decided to knack itself.
I will agree with this, the 172 gear change is excellent.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 3,593
- Location
- England
Insurance for me on a 172 at 20 is £920 fully comp ---- Bell.
@ 21 £645 with Direct Line.
@ 21 £645 with Direct Line.
My 182 feels pretty crap tbh. Good for a FWD car, but compared to a good front engine rwd box its so vague.
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 3,593
- Location
- England
I have driven a 172 for about 70-80 miles and a 182 just on a test drive.
Wasn't a fan of the gearbox in all honesty - couldnt shift as quickly as I could in my VTS.
Wasn't a fan of the gearbox in all honesty - couldnt shift as quickly as I could in my VTS.
Soldato
- Joined
- 26 Aug 2005
- Posts
- 6,901
- Location
- London
Were you granny-shifting? 
Soldato
- Joined
- 27 Mar 2004
- Posts
- 3,593
- Location
- England
No not at all, I was trying to give it some beans but it didn't seem to glide into each gear. Maybe the gearbox was nackard on the 172, everything else is
Nope I'm not joking. Bet you gave it a real workout too moving it off that drive
It's one of the first things I notice when driving other cars, for instance the Astra GSi (the turbo one) I test drove was like stirring porridge.
Yes the Hondas have a great gear change (well the ones I've driven, S2000, DC5, CTR), hence I said it was one of the nicest, not OMFG the best in the world ever
Although I wasn't a huge fan of how the CTR felt, nothing to do with the position of the lever but just the action of it.I like mine as it has some feeling and a bit of weight to it, not vague like half the stuff I've driven and hated and it's also not a notchy change.
It's all imho though, personal preference and all.
Last edited:
and Privilege, although I am old now so that might be a big factor lol. dirt cheap for me