Something up with this 172!?

digitalwolf

digitalwolf

digitalwolf

Soldato
Joined
27 Mar 2004
Posts
3,589
Location
England
A friend has just got himself a 2001 Clio 172. It's done 69k miles and has full service history.

Running at idle it is very lumpy. My mate says all of the F4R's run like that? Do they?

Also it's performance, I was expecting something really fast yet it didnt seem to put me in my seat at all.

To top it all it pulled away from my mates 306 HDi (130bhp) but hardly at a quick pace.

Is there something up with it!?

I thought Clio 172's were meant to be quick?
 
They are lumpy at idle yes. Most french hot hatches are ;)

I suspect your mate just wasn't giving it enough beans. Not surprising as he has only just bought it and wants to learn its nuances a bit first probably.

It's a 4 pot, of course, so in gear acceleration is not going to be amazing. He will need to learn the gear ratios and power bands before it begins to impress a passenger.
 
iirc not many make the 172 number, plus i'm not surprised it couldn't pull much from a tuned HDI already rolling.

pit them both together from stand still and it should pull away more noticably.
 
Last edited:
Yeah it's pretty quick from a stand still. Timed it at 7.1 secs on my stop watch to 60 with 3 people in the car and bald tyres on the front! Not accurate I know but a reasonable indication.

He was taking it to around 7k rpm. I was impressed at how high they rev.
 
that sounds fine then?

im assuming the HDI is FMIC'd? they are quite capable after a quick decat/remap/FMIC.

a guy on 306 forums recently gtech'd all his times up now he's had these done.

0-100mph

0-30 2.947s
0-40 4.085s
0-50 5.771s
0-60 7.460s
0-70 9.864s
0-80 12.462s
0-90 16.907s
0-100 21.372s

3rd gear acceleration

30-50 2.548s
40-60 2.930s

4th gear acceleration

30-50 4.095s
40-60 3.584s
50-70 3.766s
60-80 4.443s
Click to expand...

so doesn't surprise me at all. top end is where the 172 would pull away obviously. :)
 
almost all F7x's I've had were lumpy, do headwork and its rally **** style. they love to rev though.

F4R isn't a power house thats for sure, although it should hump a stock hdi
 
Fonzee, it's just chipped with a straight through system and decat with EGR disconnected.

I was just expecting to be pinned in my seat a tad thats all haha.
 
Smokey McPot said:
F4R engines aren't really very torquey, you need to change up and down to get the best from them.
Click to expand...

150lb-ft for an oldish 2 litre NA is/was pretty respectable I thought? Although I do realise the F4R peak torque is up the range a bit.

As for the OP, if it isn't just him being a girl (:p although against a tuned diesel when rolling there probably won't be masses in it) if it's had a cambelt change recently make sure it's been timed up correctly. One chap over on Cliosport was majorly down on power and it turned out the garage had the timing a bit out.

People do say they are a little lumpy on idle, but mine's always been fine (as was my old F7P too).
 
Last edited:
Was the 172's engine up to temperature. They are rev limited until they are.

I find in my 182 you have to hold onto the revs to make progress. I've no doubt that if you are caught in the wrong gear any modern reasonably powerful diesel will cause it problems.

150 lb/ft is pretty respectable for a N/A 2.0L engine, so I wouldn't say that they lack torque at all.

I'd also argue that a car roughly timed to 0 - 60 in 7.1 seconds with 3 up is anything but slow :)
 
Last edited:
[TW]Fox;12729205 said:
Provided both cars are accelerating hard is takes a significant power advantage to comfortably power off into the distance at a fair pace more than the other car.
Click to expand...

Very true, I think people underestimate what kind of power advantage you need to pass someone with absolute ease :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom