2002 Citroen Saxo VTR from UK and Ireland - Comments

The Honda EK9 is a better car in your opinion, not mine, I said loads of times I do not like Honda cars, so to me it's not a better 1.6 car..

If I wanted to buy a really fast car, I wouldn't buy a stressed out 1.6 with too much bhp for the CC's like the Honda 1.6 you keep talking about.

Front fogs mean everything on the road, a lot of these standard beamers and more expensive basic models do not have them, and when you have yours on they do not like it cause they look good. Front fogs mean more on the road than air con and cruise control.

Group 7 insurance is a lot of money if you're paying it! A first car is a 1.1 or 1.2, the VTR/VTS are not aimed at new drivers.

The Saxo VTR has a solid 100bhp, not 98bhp, just mk1 VTRs saying that cause it gives them a little "hope" they can hang with one, but in reality they can't.

You people might as well quite arguing with a man who owned Saxo's for the past 6 years, I know everything about my Saxo VTR and what it can do. I've said plenty of times, if you don't believe, I hung with a Clio 172 up to 65mph, I'll race someone with a Clio 172 and prove it and upload it on youtube. I don't BS, those 172s are heavy and down low at 10mph it's not good, where my car has instant punch all the way to 63mph in 2nd gear, and gets there rather quick, much quicker then the 9.1 Citroen claim, but I don't wanna start that again, cause you people just listen to book times, and think that's the best it can do, when there's always room to improve, especially with a brilliant driver like me.

To end this argument is to not reply, cause end of the day I always have the last say, cause I'm right & you're wrong.

Oh my word!

All this fuss about an VTR!

The VTR is a small french go-kart that was designed to be nippy, not fast, but nippy. Its got OK brakes, suspension and it looks OK, it's an 1st level hot-hatch for any hot-hatch fans on a budget.

It can't beat or keep up with the new hot-hatch machines as they have moved onto a different league. It's a respectable car that unfortunately gets a bad rep due to owners (some not) going over-board on claims and making absurd mph claims and 0-60 sprints!

There will always be this kind of thing, as it's the late 90's NEW Vauxhall Nova!

As I said before, the car is not bad, but some owners need an reality check.

So do some people replying, as I have read most of the comments, and I feel it's turning into I have this tuned and it will wipe the floor with YOU, when 99% of the time the commenters don't even own the machine they are raving about!

Thanks.

I agree with you about fog light quote!!

All this stuff about 'beating' other cars is frankly ridiculous, and if it's on the public roads, the sooner he loses his license, the better for everyone else.

I can't believe this is still going on. I know the mature thing to do is not reply, but I can't help myself, if not just because I love the sheer frustration of the the VTR man's responses, the caps lock and exclamation keys must be worn out.

It's the VTR I feel sorry for in all this, it's not a bad little car and this type of thing is making it look a complete joke of a car. Like someone else said, it replaced the Nova, and this type of thing is only confirming peoples opinions of the typical owner.

"It's the VTR I feel sorry for in all this, it's not a bad little car."

EXCUSE me, you're the one who said VTR's are crap, now you're saying you feel sorry for them???

The reason this is still going on is cause everyone on car survey is anti Saxo, and they've got nothing better to do than to call the Saxo.

I'm just defending the fact that I had a Saxo for 6 years, and you people reckon you know more than me about my car.

I've covered over 140 thousand miles in Saxos, and not one problem, so it's a reliable car in my eyes.

Do you even realise how many people are commenting on this thread, I wish this was in a forum format so you could see who was saying what.

Chances are that guy has never even insulted the Saxo, plenty of comments on here said it wasn't a bad little car, but that you were making overblown claims. Even another VTR owner is arguing with you, he has said he likes the car because it's fun and cheap, but that he disagrees with you about its capabilities.

But that he disagrees with you about its capabilities.

8.5 to 60 is not unrealistic in a mk2 VTR. Perfect launch, perfect shifts and you will be in the mid-late 8's every time, and the top speed of 130mph is very true. It takes a while to get there, but it will get there, and I don't care if you don't think so, I know so, and I can prove it by video or in real life.

The civic EK9 is not a stressed car, it produces that power whilst maintaining very good reliability. Whether you like Honda's or not is upto you, but it does not make them any worse.

The Clio 172 is not a heavy car. It weighs just over a ton, which is very light for a hot hatch. The new hatches all weigh more like 1300kg compared to the Clio's 1060ish kg. (and yes the VTR is lighter still, and IF it had the same power as the Clio it would be faster, but it doesn't).

I very much doubt that anyone who bought a VTR was also looking at these cars anyway, as they are not the same type of thing. The extra insurance and performance means that a VTR would be an odd choice compared.

I can modify my VTR and be quicker than the Clio 172, and STILL be cheaper than what you pay for the Clio 172. And don't say Clio's are better when they're not.

"I very much doubt that anyone who bought a VTR was also looking at these cars anyway, as they are not the same type of thing."

The Clio 172 is a hot hatch, the VTR is a hot hatch, so they are the same thing, like if you're looking at a supercar you look at the Porsche, Ferrari etc... same thing, even if one is quicker, it's in that category.

The Clio 172 sell around £4000, and a late good VTR £3000, so that also proves if you're looking at a VTR, you could also consider a 172, but I wouldn't go anywhere near a Clio.

I just bought an Audi TT 1.8 T quattro, and in a hour I'll be fetching it, so I let you know if it's faster than the Clio 172. (Yeah, I think so if my VTR could hang with one upto 65mph) LOL.

The VTR is not a hot hatch, why would Citroen have made the VTS if the VTR was already a performance machine? If you modify it, then you are taking it outside the safety tolerances that Citroen set, and you are going to compromise reliability.

The car is set up to handle just under 100bhp, so if you increase the power you are going to have to increase things like the brakes as well, and by the time you have done all this and declared it to your insurance, it is not going to work out cheaper than just buying and running a Clio Sport. Even you said that modifying is about making a car your own, even people who owned tuned cars admit it is not usually economical, and you end up paying more than if you just bought a fast car as standard.

Good luck with the TT, no doubt we will be hearing how this can keep up with Imprezas and Evo's. Hopefully it is the 225 version and not the 180, or you will be disappointed when you come up against a Clio Sport.

Tell you what, I will join up to 'saxperience' and post a thread in the 'engine/performance' section asking people about some of your claims.

132mph for a VTR

140mph+ for a VTS

VTR = Clio 172 from 10mph upto 65mph, and possibly upto 100mph.

This way it will be fair because these people love their Saxo's also and won't be full of 'anti-saxo' people. Saves clogging up a site that is meant to help prospective buyers decide if this is the car for them.

In the Saxo range the VTR/VTS are classed as the "hothatch versions". I'm not saying this, Citroen said it.

Applying a few mods like a Superchip, full exhaust and air induction will not be outside the safety tolerances that Citroen set. VTR's are 1 of the best cars to modify, and you are NOT going to compromise reliability. My 1.1 Saxo was modified and was the most reliable car on earth.

The Audi I got is the 225 version, so yeah it will beat a Clio 172 or a Honda Civic Type R.

"Tell you what, I will join up to 'saxperience' and post a thread in the 'engine/performance' section asking people about some of your claims."

That site proves nothing at all, 1st you got mk1 owners saying there's no difference between mk1 & mk2 LOL. There's 10bhp difference with the same weight! It's not a huge difference, but the mk2 is still quicker, and on the road the mk1 will not keep up unless the mk2 driver screws up.

Most replied that the VTR is a hot hatch and some didn't, it's just a matter of opinion and proves nothing. What proves it is that Citroen said that the 2 "hot hatch versions" are the VTR & VTS, and that is proof.

Did you know if you put a VTR box in a VTS, it makes the VTS faster, so if a VTR had 16 valves, it would be faster than the VTS LOL. The VTR is the best Saxo.

You should check saxperience and go to engine/performance - how fast can yours go? Page 5 and loads of VTR owners say 128mph -130mph on sat nav!!! I had 132 on my sat nav, and I've got the video to prove it, and sat navs are 100% accurate.