4th Dec 2006, 12:03

A Polo gti!!!.

Whoever was driving wouldn't have entertained you mate to be honest. And as for the comments about the handling being poor, you obviously have not driven one, the ZS can hold its in in a straight line and will beat an st170. Fact.

Put the ZS on a track and the ZS is in its own world, a real driver's car and one of the best fwd cars on the road.

10th Dec 2006, 10:39

My Zs180 (new shape) is quicker than a Honda Civic Type R off the lights - I've done it, and the Type R was trying VERY hard.

Great car for the money, nothing beats this car when you consider all the factors including price, running costs, etc.

11th Dec 2006, 15:23

The thing with civic type R's is, you do have to get it just right because they have quite a low torque level, so you need all those revs to get it to go. The ZS 180 on the other hand will have a fair bit more torque so you could afford to be a bit more sloppy.

9th Sep 2008, 18:22

Decent enough cars for the money, but people going on about torque making the car faster than Clio 182's and Civic Type R's are not being realistic. They are quicker cars, no way around it. With a good driver in the ZS and a poor one in either the Civic or Clio, perhaps you could pull ahead, but in a straight line with Joe average driving both cars, the ZS would be a fair way behind, or even on a track with a trained race driver the times for the ZS would struggle against these cars.

As for ST170's killing ZS180's or vice versa, it's completely driver dependent as these cars both handle pretty well and are almost identical power to weight (which for the guy saying it doesn't matter, actually it does, and is a fairly good indicator up to a point).

17th Dec 2008, 16:44

People always say the MG ZS 180 will not beat a Clio 172/182, it really annoys me. Torque plays a massive factor in a drag race and a ZS has a lot more. Also people always look at max power, it's when you get that power, Clios are gutless as are Type Rs. I have owned a ZS; it had remap, back box and ITG induction and had 195 bhp. My brother has an Impreza turbo 2000 and it was neck and neck, and faster than a Type R at high speed.

18th Dec 2008, 09:42

They are good for the money, but standard for standard are never gonna be faster than any kind of Type R or 182/172 as they are down on power and up on weight in comparison!

For the record the civic Type R is hardly gutless as that's always what people argue that they have no torque etc, but what they forget is that it s only a 2 litre engine and for its size produces more torque than most other 2 litre n/a engines, and as they are geared low they have plenty of low down punch for every day use!

18th Dec 2008, 11:08

Just look at book figures and it's pretty obvious why the 180 is slower than Type R's and Clio Sports. The CTR has 197bhp and weighs the same as the ZS (well actually slightly less, but near enough), whereas the ZS has 175bhp, but torque will mean in a '4th gear at 50mph' test, you can out pull the Civics and Clios, but other than that, it is slower.

You can't argue that the torque in the ZS makes it faster than other cars with more BHP and less torque, then go on to say that you can match Impreza's, as they have a bucket load of torque anyway...

26th Mar 2010, 19:50

The 180 is an old mans car. Plenty of torque, comfy, loads of space. If you want something fast and fun, get the Clio.

14th Oct 2010, 15:50

Clio has too many things to go wrong - body control modules etc. Stick with the Rover.