2002 Citroen Saxo VTR from UK and Ireland - Comments

How is a Ford Focus 1.8 faster than my VTR? A Focus 1.8 0-60 10.5, mk2 VTR 0-60 9.1. I would eat a 1.8 Focus short shifting. Nova GTE on a much lighter body does 0-60 in... 9.1 OH THE SAME AS MY VTR and the light draggy Nova would lose so bad up top. Fiesta XR2i again mid range to top end will lose to my VTR, look at the stats - it weighs 885KG, so as the speeds climb so does DRAG, so the super light Fiesta will lose to my VTR and with it being so old I bet it's lost a few pony's too, so 0-60 is nowhere near its official time, so again I win.

May vary from person to person, but 9 seconds 0-60 in my eyes is average.

So what part of England are you from? Nobody drives Kas, Micras, basic cars?? Everyone is driving Type Rs and Clio 182s are they? If every single person was in those cars, yeah maybe performance wise my VTR would be AVERAGE, but everyday I'm out in town and on the motorway, there are 80% of cars that are slower than me, and only 20% that are quicker, so it's not average. Nearly every race I'm in I win, and I race some quick stuff like a BMW sporty convertible, I didn't expect to hang with him at all, but blimey perfect shifting and the will power helps a lot.

I seem to be good behind the wheel, I can drive my mate's car better than him. It's LIKE I SAID, YOU'RE BORN WITH THESE GENES, no Pass Plus will give them to you. Don't think cause you maybe older than me that you're better than me; I've been in motor vehicles all my life.

I think you misunderstand what the other person was saying, I think he means it's average for what it is. Of course it's gonna keep up with a 1.8 Mondeo, they are not fast cars.

What you mean it isn't fast? It does 130mph and has got 16 valves and 23bhp more and more torque, it certainly doesn't hang about, and the point is it's a bigger engine, ya comparing 2.0+ 150bhp+ cars to a VTR, which is silly of course. After 60 they will prove their league, but under 60 there still is hope with the right driver.

I have no fear to challenge any Clio 182 under 60mph, it's all about applying the throttle right and letting the clutch out smoothly for a turbo response, that's how I did 0-60 8.6 in a stock VTR, and you people have to understand that the faster the vehicle gets, the harder it is for a average person to achieve its stats. Anyone can do the paper figure of a 1.0L 0-60 with ease, but as cars get more power you get wheelspin and traction issues, which take an amount of skill to overcome.

The Clio 182 does 0-60 in 7 flat, but average people will not get near that, and those sort of people have to rely on the power to be fast. It's like with my bike; it does 0-60 in 3, but at traffic lights I don't bother with that, it's too risky with the front wheel popping up, so I beat cars with the power of it; it usually only takes the first gear to end a race with my bike LOL.

You are wrong about the other 1.6 8v hot hatches.

The 205 1.6 GTI has a 0-60 of 8.7 seconds, the XR2i is 8.9 and the Nova GSI 9.1. Your official VTR 0-60 is 9.2 for the mk2 and 9.9 for the mk1, and all of the other hot hatches have a better top end speed than the VTR; the Nova coming closest at 119 mph - your VTR is 117 mph.

And what do you mean the lighter they are, the more they drag?? That's to do with aerodynamics, not weight. When it suits you, it's better when it's light, when something else is lighter than yours, it drags! LOL.

"For example (I will use the mark 1 Ford Focus as it is from the same era as the VTR) the VTR is faster than the Focus with all the engines up to the 1.8, then slower than the 2.0, ST170, RS and possibly the diesel. Putting it right in the centre of the range = average. Same can be done for the Astra of the same era."

You're still comparing a VTR with cars with 2.0+ engines, and using that as your average range, and that is just plain wrong.

The Saxo VTR is a good 1.6 car, and it's only a 8v; cars you bring up are either 16 valves or weigh 855KG with more bhp. The VTR weighs 920kg with a 8v engine and still manages same 0-60 as a Nova GTE, it may feel quicker but that's just the effect of its smallness. I raced 1 months ago and left it standing. The Nova is a old car so it has lost a few ponies now; my VTR is 1 of the last ones made, and I haven't done many miles in it, and I use top of the range fuel to keep the performance up, and I maintain her well.

Nobody said the 1.8 Focus was faster, the guy said all the Focus' upto (possibly including as it should be close between them) the 1.8 are slower and the rest of the range is quicker.

If you want to do the Astra range as well then OK, all of them upto the 1.6 are slower, then the 1.8, 2.2 and 2.0 turbo engines are all quicker (there are loads of these on the road).

Where I drive, there are loads of normal cars i.e. Focus 2.0 litres, Astra 2.2, BMW 320d, Mondeo V6's, 1.7 Puma's, which are faster than your car, as well as other common cars which are slower like Corsa SXi's, Nissan Micras etc. That is why it is average.

Maybe if you compare the VTR to cars on the road and not a 6th form car park / McDonalds in the evenings, then you will appreciate it is not faster than 80% (another random stat) of cars on the road.

Quit telling us how good you are at driving, nobody cares or particularly believes it. Driving in your genes, LOL. You make it sound like you are Neo out of the Matrix, and your attitude is what started this whole argument when you felt the need to tell the world how you are an excellent driver. Go into motorsport if you are so brilliant, it shouldn't take long to get noticed if you are as good as you claim. I would love to see you do a lap with a proper race driver next to you so they could take you down a few (much needed) pegs.

According to Parkers, the holy grail of car stats, the slowest Z4 does 0-60 in 8.0 seconds... I guess he just 'short-shifted' and didn't bother. Or maybe you have a poor perception of when a car is quicker than you.

So on the basis that you're a brilliant driver. Then ANY car that you drive would be quicker with you behind the wheel, not just the Saxo. Your comments regarding how quickly you press the throttle don't fair to well when we are talking about modern, computer controlled, fuel injected engines. The cars computer will give the best possible engine response for any given throttle position in literally a few thousandths of a second. There are people in this thread now who really know what they are on about, I certainly don't claim to be one of them, my knowledge is limited at best. But I think you should realise your arguments are flawed.

"You are wrong about the other 1.6 8v hot hatches.

The 205 1.6 GTI has a 0-60 of 8.7 seconds, the XR2i is 8.9 and the Nova GSI 9.1. Your official VTR 0-60 is 9.2 for the mk2 and 9.9 for the mk1, and all of the other hot hatches have a better top end speed than the VTR; the Nova coming closest at 119 mph - your VTR is 117 mph.

And what do you mean the lighter they are, the more they drag?? That's to do with aerodynamics, not weight. When it suits you, it's better when it's light, when something else is lighter than yours, it drags! LOL."

I mean seriously 9.2, 9.1, 8.9, in reality those gaps wouldn't separate them and would depend on the driver, and you're also forgetting that those cars are almost 20 yrs old, and those 0-60 will not be the same in 2009 as they will have high mileage and lost of a lot of puff. I raced a XR2i of the lights once and this was the case as I was a car lengh in front.

You're still giving the VTR a 117mph top speed LOL; that is BS for the mk2 VTR, it gets to 120mph no problem. Do you want me to do a top speed run and show you??? I'm getting really sick of the hatred for the VTR. Stop slowing it down, mk2 top speed 120+ 0-60 9's flat.

A Nova's design is like a square box, and inside them past 60mph the air just holds them back, it feels like all the windows are open but they're shut tight. It's a terrible car to be in, and the mid range and top end is has bad as a 1.1. As for pulling, it might get to 119mph but it will take the whole runway to reach it. My VTR gets to 120mph much quicker - FUEL INJECTION!

I think before you know it all speak, you should watch some videos of VTRs on youtube and see how quick they are, and their top speed.

Listen there's no point in any of us arguing with him, he's a 'DRIVING GOD' among us mere mortals 'nuff said.

He can make an average everyday luke warm hatch perform miracles and stay with the cream of hot hatches such as Type-R's, 182's etc etc to 80mph. Funny how he said it was between 10-65mph before, make your mind up, his argument has more holes in it than a 40 year old rusty mini.

To say a lighter car drags more because it ways less???!! Hmm I agree with one of the other posters, that is to do with aerodynamics not weight.

Caterhams are a prime example of this, possibly some of the worst aerodynamics in modern motoring (obviously being a 50's design), but do you see them 'dragging' through the air at 100mph??? Hmm nope didn't think so, on the basis of what you say, something like an R500 etc. would not be able to get away from you after 80mph, correct?

But then again, now I've brought that little point up you will probably hit back at me and others stating something different (and before you say it, NO I am not comparing any Caterham to a Saxo as that would be silly and pointless) I am merely making a point using the Caterham as my example.

You may know how to get the best from your car, but even then your times are so optimistic, either there is a fault in your car's instruments or your timing gear is not very accurate.

I hope I've made my point. Jeb.

I had a VTR, and I have commented here before. Top speed for mine was 120mph and only just. The needle was actually indicating 126mph but the satnav said 120mph. The Saxo instruments are not as accurate as they could be.

"Stop slowing it down, mk2 top speed 120+ 0-60 9's flat."

--Quote--

At last! Reasonable performance figures from you (although 120+ is misleading, as it won't get much above that actual speed). I wonder if you are finally seeing sense or have just lost interest now you are getting rid of your VTR. This is a far shout from the 8 and a half seconds to 60 and 132mph top speed you claimed previously.

The cars with 1.8 and 2.0 engines which are quicker do have bigger engines etc, but the point was made to show that compared to other cars on the road it is average when you look at any engine size.

For a 1.6 8 valve, it is pretty normal given the examples brought up (not all old cars lose power, and your VTR is 7 years old now anyway), besides which all those 'old' cars were getting the same performance from a 1.6 8 valve way before the Saxo ever did. There aren't that many 1.6 8valve engines to compare it to, to be honest, but even if you look at 1.4 16 valve engines, there are others which produce the same and more bhp and use lighter blocks (1.4 K series for one). And if you make the jump up to a 1.6 16 valve and compare it, then the bhp per litre is very unimpressive, because of Honda Type R's which use variable valve technology and are infinitely more impressive.

The only reason a VTR can go faster than some cars with bigger engines is because it is light and small. The engine doesn't produce a massive amount of power for a 1.6. However even the kerb weight is not enough when comparing to faster cars.

Your lack of knowledge about cars is shown again when you say you use premium fuel... The higher RON fuel only makes a difference on cars which are intended for it, otherwise it won't help as your car will have an engine map for 96 RON.

As for Saxo's being easy to get book figures and other cars being difficult because they have too much power? If this was the case, why would anyone buy fast cars if they only went as quick as slower ones because the power rendered the car unable to get it down? Even cars like Astra VXR's with 240bhp get the power down reasonably well, and anything under 200bhp will be very easy to launch (even for mere mortals such as myself).

What do you mean "FUEL INJECTION"? All the cars I've mentioned are fuel injection, you really are showing your lack of knowledge about cars now. They are all 1.6 injection 8v, that's why I compared them to your standard Saxo.

If you want to talk about videos, there is also ones on you tube of GSI's beating Saxo's not by much but beating it. I've owned a GSI in the past, standard, they are not like a 1.1 midrange as you put it, you should drive other cars before deciding the VTR is the best.

And another thing, say there was a clone of you and your godlike driving skills, do you really think your VTR would stay with a 182 up to 65 mph? We are talking about the cars capabilities, not the drivers.

I raced Ford Focus 2.0 and 1.7 Puma and I beat them, 0.1 to 60 doesn't change anything in real life; the other cars you bring up are 2.2 engines etc... if you want to be like that, I can bring my bike into it and smoke every damn car you name. STOP BRINGING TYPE R'S INTO IT, THEY ARE NOT EVERYDAY CARS.

The BMW I raced couldn't have been a Z4 cause it was a convertible, but I thought I saw on the back Z4; guess I'm wrong.

"Caterhams are a prime example of this, possibly some of the worst aerodynamics in modern motoring (obviously being a 50's design), but do you see them 'dragging' through the air at 100mph??? Hmm nope didn't think so, on the basis of what you say, something like an R500 etc. would not be able to get away from you after 80mph, correct?"

OMG. A a R500 has got 230bhp, of course at 80mph it would fly away regardless of its terrible drag. The cars I'm talking about are a VTR and Nova GTE, which have similar power and size.

Why did someone say Honda Integra Type-R = the king.

Because it's not; my Lotus Carlton craps on the Integra Type-R.

Like the Bugatti Veyron craps on my Lotus Carlton.

And by the way I love Honda cars.

Come on why compare a Honda Integra Type R with a Citroen Saxo; they're both different as man and women LOL.

"Your lack of knowledge about cars is shown again when you say you use premium fuel... The higher RON fuel only makes a difference on cars which are intended for it, otherwise it won't help as your car will have an engine map for 96 RON."

You lack of knowledge. I own a old bike and putting old fuel in and new "excellium" fuel in makes a big difference. It doesn't matter how old the machine is, and my VTR is not 7 years old, it's a 2003 model so that would make it just a little over 6 years as it's registered 31th July. Don't tell that those old Fiesta XR2is still have the same BHP when new, anything that is over 10 yrs old isn't the same when it was new. You'd be lucky to find an XR2i with less than 120,000 miles on it, where my VTR is only 30,000, so a big difference in reality.

Saxo VTr 1.6 8v natural aspired is not average for a 1.6 car. Fiesta Zetec S 1.6 16v 102bhp SLOWER!!! NEW Zetec S SLOWER!!! GET IT!!! Average my ass, just typical stereotyping the Saxo. If it was average I wouldn't hang with Beamers and Fiesta ST's would I. Oh I get it, the ST is now average I bet FFS!

If you've seen a Nova beat a VTR on video, either the Nova was modified, the VTR was a mk1 or had a crappy driver; never happened to me. Check out my vids.

"What do you mean "FUEL INJECTION" all the cars I've mentioned are fuel injection, you really are showing your lack of knowledge about cars now."

I know that, I was using a phrase from Nightmare on Elm Street part 5 where Freddy say's "fuel injection" on the bike.

"At last! Reasonable performance figures from you (although 120+ is misleading, as it won't get much above that actual speed)."

How do you know for sure, have you had your foot down to the metal or you just thinking it's only a baby Citroen, it's not capable of it? 100bhp in good weather on a good straight can easily pass 120mph.

If you want, I can prove this by doing a top speed run and have my mate next to me on his ZX-9 who has a helmet cam, and he can film his speed and my car at the same time, and a ZX-9 will do 132mph no problem, and this will prove that my 132mph on my VTR's dials is not fake. Funny how all these haters say Saxo clocks are not accurate, but other cars are 100% accurate - how anti Saxo does that sound???

Seems like you've raced and beat any car that anyone cares to mention.

"The BMW I raced couldn't have been a Z4 cause it was a convertible, but I thought I saw on the back Z4; guess I'm wrong."

Actually you can get a BMW Z4 convertible. There are in fact more convertible versions around than there are coupe versions.