1995 Renault Clio Reviews - Page 3 of 11

1995 Renault Clio RT 1.4 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1995
First year of ownership2006
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 1.4 Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired90000 miles
Most recent distance100000 miles
Previous carRenault Clio

Summary:

Excellent First Car!!!

Faults:

I got the car and I needed to change the cam belt when I put it in for an MOT. That's all really, there have been no other faults.

General Comments:

I was at school in sixth form when I found an advert in our common room which showed that a red Clio was on for sale for £125. As anyone else would think... its probably a very bad car! At the time I has just started my driving lessons and I needed a car so I thought I would check it out. I turned out to be a really good car. The car was being sold by my teacher, a woman so there was virtually nothing wrong with it as she had been a careful driver. It was so cheap because one of the locks was broken (fixed by my friends dad very easily) and the MOT and road Tax were both due.

My Clio is a 1.4 and pumps out around 80 BHP, it also has electric windows and central locking. It's a very reliable car as since I've got it all I needed to do was to replace the cam belt. It has a very responsive engine and I don't think I could have possibly got a better car for 125 pounds in this life time. I've read all the other reviews on Clios and I'm pleased to say all my electrics still work perfectly :D. I have recently installed a CD player and a sub woofer into my Clio, also some 16 inch fox racing alloys which make it look very sporty. So far my Clio has been very reliable and I want to keep it for as long I can.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 22nd March, 2006

1995 Renault Clio 16V 1.8i DOHC from UK and Ireland

Model year1995
Year of manufacture1995
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2005
Engine and transmission 1.8i DOHC Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired75000 miles
Most recent distance77000 miles
Previous carRenault Clio

Summary:

Great hot hatch - good valve for money- very fast!!!

Faults:

Clutch cable went, shortly followed by the clutch itself.

The rear arches are also starting to rust, which will need sorting soon.

General Comments:

I brought my Clio 16V in May, and I love it. It is the very rare Silver colour, and has an immaculate leather interior. It has cost me a lot of money though, but I am able to look past this, because I have wanted one for so long.

So far I have replaced the cam belt (£240, but can cost up too £520), and changed the oil etc. It does need a new clutch, because when it heats up, the springs stretch, and it doesn’t work properly, and this could cost up to £300. The rear arches also need sorting, and when I bought the car, I was given a quote for £175 to do this. This is for a slap dash job though, and it will cost about £400-£600 to do it properly.

The car drives very well and is set up for driving fast. I previously had a 1.4 RT, which was a good handling car, but lacked the brakes and suspension of the 16V, which are exceptional, and certainly better than I expected. It can corner at very high speeds, and on windy back roads, I can take corners much faster than normal cars (without going stupid).

The engine has a lot of power and torque. I’m sure you are all familiar with the specs; 0-60 in 7.7secs, max speed of about 140mph (if you’re brave), 137bhp. Basically this means it pulls in all gears and at any revs. The majority of power comes after 4000rpm, which is where the revs will be when you are going fast. But when you are driving around town and don’t want to use up loads of fuel, you will never go above 4000, so it stays just as functional as a normal Clio. It will outperform most hot hatches, including the wannabes like Clio RSI’s, Saxo VTR’s, Peugeot 206 GTi.

The styling of the car is one of the things that attracted me most to the car. I do prefer Renaults to the other alternatives anyway, but when you park next to the Fiesta RS Turbo and the Punto GTT, it’s the Clio which looks the most aggressive. The flared wheel arches and power bulge on the bonnet look menacing, and the big wheels add to the effect. My car is sitting on 17” chromes, which just add to the look. I parked next to a 1.2 RL yesterday, which is the base model, and it was only then that I realised just how aggressive and different the 16V is.

The car is expensive to run, purely because it is a performance car. The engine bay is tight, and many mechanics avoid it because it will be difficult to work on. There are a few people like K-tec who specialise in them (and did my cambelt).

The insurance is also pricey (especially as I’m a 19 year old male),but I did find out today why that is when a 17 year old attempting to race me (in a rubbishy Megane 1.4), and nearly caused me to crash by being a prat (young, inexperienced drivers who think they are racers, who know-no-fear in slow cars, are bad, so if you got one in a car as fast as mine, it could cost the insurer a lot of money). It is a problem when people try to take you on, and it happens quite often. I am quite sensible, so I will do my best to ignore it and let them go speeding off. If I go faster, they will go faster until you reach a point where you are doing 60 in a 30, which is not a good idea.

OVERALL:

This is a great car, and if you want a hot hatch for this money, this is the one to get. It may not be turbo, but it is just as fast as the turbo equivalents. The styling stands out from the crowd, and still looks good now. It is pretty reliable, and as far as hot hatches go, good on the insurance. The car is set up for driving fast, and in my opinion it is safer to do 40 in this car than it is to do 30 in the 1.4 RT, because the brakes are that much better.

One thing I will recommend is you buy a mint one. I bought mine with the rust and the last service (cambelt) overdue. Add the costs of these to what I paid, and I could have brought a mint condition one. Also, if you don’t want to crash it, don’t take stupid risks. You can still enjoy the car without going stupid.

For more information on the 16V visit the WilliamsClio club www.williamsclio.co.uk website. There are lots of knowledgeable people there who can tell you what’s wrong, and give you buying hints and tips.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 6th August, 2005

3rd Oct 2005, 14:14

A really great review, very helpful. I also own a 1.4rt Clio planning on buying a 16v. I was wondering if the differaence after 4000rpm in the 16v power is really noticeable, and driving around town what mpg will you get from the 16v thank you.

16th Oct 2005, 08:14

MPG isn't much worse than the RT. It's the extra road tax and insurance that's a pain. Other little things are it's awkward to work on, so garages jack up the price.

The pull after 4000 is like this (Number = 1000 RPM)... 1112223334456789!!!! If that makes sense. Another way of putting it is that if someone is trying to out run you in a normal car, they will be about level with you, and then whoosh, they are behind you in the distance. It's only fun in the higher rev range, but obviously this is good for fuel, as it's not running fast all the time.

Hope this helps.

11th Aug 2006, 04:33

I also had a 1.4RT, and have driven my 16v for over a year now. Having got back into a RT to see the difference, I was amazed. I used to think the RT was a fairly decent car pace wise, but it felt broken compared to the 'Valver.' These cars are great fun to drive, BUT they are NOT reliable! If you can only just afford the buying price and the insurance, then don't expect it to be your best mate if you thrash it too much.

P.s. these cars are stunning the way they are, please DON'T stick 17" alloys (especially not chrome!!!) on them. It doesn't add to the looks, completely destroys the car's personality. I found adding 195tyres instead of the 185s on the original alloys bulked the wheels up nicely. Toyo proxies would be my choice. Compliment the aggressive look perfectly.

3rd Oct 2006, 10:28

I can't say I agree with the comment on 17's. I have 5 spoke 17 inch alloys on my valver and they look awesome. Added with the lowered/stiffened suspension and nankang 205/40 tyres the road holding is something else. Standard alloys look nice I agree, but steel from that 'aggressive' image through pure lack of presence.

5th Mar 2007, 06:37

I'd like to think that the valver can do 0-60 in 7.7 seconds, but they don't more like 8.7.

8th Nov 2007, 09:33

I think it depends on how good a condition your engine is in. I know some are pretty rubbish, but I timed mine off a video and it was definitly 7.7 (as near as I could tell)

Average review marks: 7.7 / 10, based on 39 reviews