Clio 197

Think it looks great personally. I'm sure the 182 had a list price of over 14k, sure the 197 is a tad pricey at list price, but they won't go at that price...
 
I don't like it. Quite a comedown in looks from the 172/182 IMO.

People keep going on about the weight because the reason the Clios ever stood up alongside the other great hothatches of recent times is that they had a weight advantage over them all. This one doesn't have the power to match its more expensive, more powerful peers and doesn't have quite the weight advantage as previous either.
 
FincH said:
Why do idiots keep on going on about the weight?

It may weigh more but still has the same Bhp/Ton as a full fat 182 and the same 0-60 (6.9 seconds). Hardly slow.

At the end of the day a lot of it will be down to the way it drives and it does have some serious suspension, braking and aerodynamics to its name.
Click to expand...

Interesting how you call several of us idiots, then contradict yourself.

As you rightly point out, the Clio is fast, but that's never really been the point to the old 172/180. It's always been about how it "feels" and how much fun it is down a bendy road, and that's where the extra weight will kill things. Extra weight requires bigger brakes, reduces agility, reduces steering feel and makes the car less economical. In other words, it is the primary enemy of any decent sports car. Just imagine how good the Elise would be if it weighed as much!
 
Lowe said:
As for it having 8 pots? Where does it say it's got 8 pots? Look like Brembo 4 pots to me, which isn't a bad thing to have by any mean stretch...
Click to expand...

Towrads the end of the article:

Article said:
Much more serious brakes - 312mm cross-drilled discs at the front with eight-pot callipers, 300mm items at the rear
Click to expand...
 
Kingy said:
£16.5k? Wasn't the old one around £12k? That's a crazy amount of money for such a small car. I get the whole hot hatch thing, but seriously, only an extra grand for a Focus ST? I know where my money would go.
Click to expand...

Well within ST2 territory, think Renault have priced it a tad high. Will have to wait and see how it handles to see if that extra weight really causes problems.

To be honest its a bit fresher looking than the old clio, at the end of the day though the old 172 and 182 were ok looking but they werent Alfa style design masterpieces (just added to the charm :) ).
 
Arc said:
Well within ST2 territory, think Renault have priced it a tad high.
Click to expand...

How many times! :)


Firestar_3x said:
As posted before, 12k for the 182 was not its list price thats how much you coud get them for, 16.5k is the list price of the 197 not how much you can get them for..................
Click to expand...
 
To be honest though I can't remember the last time a re-design of an OCUK favouite met with any approval. Just look at the new BMW designs when they first came out, oh the shock, the outrage. Then give it a few months and everybody's loving them. :p

I'm not overly fussed on the looks but I don't think it looks bad. The grill could probably have been done better but other than that its ok.
 
Gilly said:
I don't like it. Quite a comedown in looks from the 172/182 IMO.

People keep going on about the weight because the reason the Clios ever stood up alongside the other great hothatches of recent times is that they had a weight advantage over them all. This one doesn't have the power to match its more expensive, more powerful peers and doesn't have quite the weight advantage as previous either.
Click to expand...

It has the same power to weight as a 182 and the same 0-60...

Mr_Sukebe said:
Interesting how you call several of us idiots, then contradict yourself.

As you rightly point out, the Clio is fast, but that's never really been the point to the old 172/180. It's always been about how it "feels" and how much fun it is down a bendy road, and that's where the extra weight will kill things. Extra weight requires bigger brakes, reduces agility, reduces steering feel and makes the car less economical. In other words, it is the primary enemy of any decent sports car. Just imagine how good the Elise would be if it weighed as much!
Click to expand...

And the new Clio as a whole is bigger.

It's over 20cm longer than a 182 and has a larger wheelbase. I'm sure it was designed with the weight (all 120Kg extra) in mind to be a great car and a great drive.

Suppose the real way to tell will be to test drive one :)
 
FincH said:
It has the same power to weight as a 182 and the same 0-60...
Click to expand...
I'd be interested to see time differences round a bendy track, because 0-60 means sweet FA when you're talking about weight. Just throw more power at it.
 
lordrobs said:
To be honest though I can't remember the last time a re-design of an OCUK favouite met with any approval. Just look at the new BMW designs when they first came out, oh the shock, the outrage. Then give it a few months and everybody's loving them. :p
Click to expand...

I think you'll find most people on here are still anti-bangle BMW.. apart from the kids who are too young to know better ;)
 
Gilly said:
I'd be interested to see time differences round a bendy track, because 0-60 means sweet FA when you're talking about weight. Just throw more power at it.
Click to expand...

More torque and better suspension on the 197.
 
FincH said:
It has the same power to weight as a 182 and the same 0-60...



And the new Clio as a whole is bigger.

It's over 20cm longer than a 182 and has a larger wheelbase. I'm sure it was designed with the weight (all 120Kg extra) in mind to be a great car and a great drive.

Suppose the real way to tell will be to test drive one :)
Click to expand...

But if I wanted a bigger car, I'd buy a CTR, which in the old bread van configuration, was the same price. Would you seriously chose a Renault over a Honda at the same money?
 
Mr_Sukebe said:
But if I wanted a bigger car, I'd buy a CTR, which in the old bread van configuration, was the same price. Would you seriously chose a Renault over a Honda at the same money?
Click to expand...

Yes but they wont sell for the rrp so its a pointless argument. :)

And the type r was
Honda
Civic Type-R (01 on)
2.0i VTEC 3d (AC)

List Price: £17,950 :)
 
Last edited:
Mr_Sukebe said:
But if I wanted a bigger car, I'd buy a CTR, which in the old bread van configuration, was the same price. Would you seriously chose a Renault over a Honda at the same money?
Click to expand...

Depends which I prefered the drive and styling of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom