2002 Citroen Saxo VTR from UK and Ireland - Comments

Clearly they aren't accurate. No-one is hating Saxo's. I'm not.. I used to own one. Give up.

OK then, let's take it from new, the XR2i has 110 bhp standard, the 205 has 115 bhp as standard and the Nova 100. All of these cars are a lot older in design yet produce more power, are lighter and have better acceleration and top speed. How well maintained they are is irrelevant, not all VTRs are gonna be 100%, you have to compare both at tip top condition.

I don't think anyone on here is anti Saxo, I'm certainly not, my brother owns a mk2, I've driven it and really like it, it's fun. But you have to keep it into perspective, it is what it is, nothing more.

Most speedo's overread, especially at higher speeds and nobody ever denied this.

Type R's are common as muck round where I live, and I often see EP3 civics driven round by middle aged women and young lads etc etc, loads of people have them; why else are there so many on Autotrader etc etc.

"OK then, lets take it from new, the XR2i has 110 bhp standard, the 205 has 115 bhp as standard and the nova 100, all of these cars are a lot older in design yet produce more power, are lighter and have better acceleration and top speed. how well maintained they are is irrelevant, not all VTRs are gonna be 100%, you have to compare both at tip top condition. You just make things up as you go along, probably just to see how long you can make this thread last."

--Quote--

Exactly! From a technical standpoint the VTR is not special, older cars were achieving more impressive feats years before and it has now boiled down to a 'my VTR is the fastest VTR in the world and I am the best driver and combined we are unbeatable' comment.

Ford fiesta XRi2 is not fast today... you can't time warp the VTR back to 1989. TODAY in 2009 the VTR is quicker and faster than an XRi2, end of the day miles affects performance and a XRi2 will be clocking a lot of them.

"Clearly they aren't accurate. No-one is hating Saxo's. I'm not.. I used to own one. Give up."

I will NOT give up, I did hang with a Fiesta ST and a sporty Beamer and I did surprise a Clio 182. Why would I make this up??? Nowadays people think they know it all by reading a few pages of paper stats, which half the time are incorrect, look at any site about the Fiesta 1.1 LX (my first car) 0-60 18 seconds and top speed 94mph WTF??? It wasn't 6 seconds slower to 60 than my 1.1 Saxo, which did 0-60 12's flat, and its top speed was 100mph, not 94mph.

PAPER FACTS ARE NOT 100% CORRECT ABOUT WHAT A VEHICLE CAN DO. END OF TOPIC!!!.

How many times can one person shoot themselves in the foot? Seriously?! haha.

I agree paper times are not always 100% from the manufacturers, but seriously mate, every car magazine who has ever had a Saxo VTR, 'BRAND NEW' I might add, has never achieved better than 9.1 seconds, give it up, you will always lose this argument, your comments are pointless, you just admitted before it was around 9 seconds dead so you ended your own argument. Fiesta STs, Civic Type-Rs, Clio Sports etc. are all much faster than your Saxo; newer, nicer to drive and don't fall to bits.

I've had experience of all of the above cars, have you? Apart from the Saxo obviously, so I can be subjective. The Civic and Clio are almost identical in performance terms, nothing in it really, definitely depends on the driver, but either one will easily eat any Saxo, even the 'coveted' as you describe VTS will not have a chance. Give it up mate, you're just getting more and more people in on the argument who know what they're on about.

No it isn't, how do you know how many miles a random XR2i has done? Or how well it's maintained? And I've already said that's irrelevant, we are talking about how impressive the VTR is, and it is very average for what it is, older cars did better, there is no getting around that.

Oh my bad, I got the PAPER figure of the top speed wrong of the Fiesta 1.1 LX. The paper figure top speed is 88mph, LOL how wrong is that!!

And about 15 minutes ago I was doing 120mph in my VTR AGAIN. If only I had my camcorder pointing at the needle on 120mph to prove 117mph is not its top speed.

Speedometers are not accurate at high speeds. This is not just Saxo VTRs, but all cars...

Also what are you doing at that sort of speed so often; slow down before you kill someone. Even with your superhuman capabilities, it isn't safe. I have been in a Saxo at high speeds and cannot understand why someone would do that to themselves more than once.

No, you thought you were doing 120, when they test these cars they use the proper equipment on a flat surface, not downhill.

Just saw this ongoing debate we have here and it made me laugh. Currently own a VTR Mark 2 98bhp model, owned it the last 3 years. It is a nippy car, with decent pulling power through the gears even in 5th gear for a small car. However, it is badly made and very light as it is full of plastic, but I understood that when I bought it. Enjoyed it the last few years, but there are a lot more quicker and better cars out there.

Funnily enough, going to test drive a Civic Type R on Saturday for my "Grown up", "Suit wearing" graduate job. So it's not only Audi drivers that wear suits.

The Saxo is good for what it is; a nippy, warm hatch. It can not compare with most other hot hatches and there are plenty of 1.6 litre cars out there now that put it to shame; Corsa VXR for example. It's been a brilliant, small car over the last 3 years, I've had fun but it's time to move on!

"I agree paper times are not always 100% from the manufacturers, but seriously mate, every car magazine who has ever had a Saxo VTR, 'BRAND NEW' I might add, has never achieved better than 9.1 seconds, give it up, you will always lose this argument, your comments are pointless, you just admitted before it was around 9 seconds dead so you ended your own argument. Fiesta STs, Civic Type-Rs, Clio Sports etc. are all much faster than your Saxo; newer, nicer to drive and don't fall to bits.

I've had experience of all of the above cars, have you? Apart from the Saxo obviously, so I can be subjective. The Civic and Clio are almost identical in performance terms, nothing in it really, definitely depends on the driver, but either one will easily eat any Saxo, even the 'coveted' as you describe VTS will not have a chance. Give it up mate, you're just getting more and more people in on the argument who know what they're on about."

No, I've had experience with better cars like Porsche GT3, Ferrari 355 & Aston Martin DB9 on the Nurburgring, so to label a Type R as an exotic car makes me laugh, they're not even good looking!! Plus I have a 0-60 in 3 second bike that laughs out loud at Type Rs; can a Type R do 1/4mile in 11 seconds?? No it can't.

Fiesta ST is no faster up to 80mph than my VTR.

SEE!! You just proved you're anti Saxo with the comment "newer, nicer to drive and don't fall to bits". None of the cars you named are more fun to drive than a VTR, and a VTR doesn't fall to bits, so I point and laugh at you wasting money on insurance on a Type R; go pass your bike test if you want speed; cars are for A-B.

Civic Type R and Clio Sport almost identical??? Type R 0-60 6.4, top speed 146mph, Clio 0-60 7.0, top speed 138mph; almost identical??? So a VTS, which is only 0.5 slower than a Clio 182 to 60 has no chance, BUT a Type R that is 0.6 quicker than a Clio 182 to 60 makes them identical??? Double standards, hey??

"No, you thought you were doing 120, when they test these cars they use the proper equipment on a flat surface, not downhill."

How is the road downhill? Complete straight and 120mph with no problem. I will upload a video and show you if you think you know it all.

End of the day I'm a car driver and a bike rider, so I'm better than all of you. You people have it easy driving a car with your power steering; riding a bike at speed requires skill and natural genes, and when you've been on a bike and then step back into a car, your car skill is 10x better, and you can take any car to its full potential because you've been on a bike that exceeds any car in performance. So when you name cars like Type Rs and Clio 182, I point and laugh, as if those "figures" will impress me LOL 182 0-60 7?? My bike is doing 100mph in that time hahahaha.

A 1990 Honda Civic or CRX vtec would put the Saxo to shame; these are 19 years old now and produce 160bhp from a 1.6 na and would still leave a Saxo VTR standing; they are even quicker than the VTS version.

Stop going on about the Saxo guys, cos all I see on this site are comments on how fast the Saxo VTR can go from 0-60.

Every time some one mentions quicker cars, you defend yourself by bringing your bike into it. Who cares what a bike will do, and you really think that driving a bike will improve your car skills that much? You steer a bike by leaning, you steer a car with a wheel - they are nothing alike. At the end of the day you can only go so fast on the roads, and to use a bike's full potential you'd need to take it to a track where a half decent performance car will show it up at the first set of bends!