Why you making all this up? What do you think the 172 stands for? The Focus RS has 212 and is very responsive and has a lot of torque. I don't like Japanese cars, but WRXs are much faster than your Clio. RS Turbos with a few mods will also see off your car (as they only have 132bhp to start with).
Some of the newer WRX's are not that quick actually. They are quick 0-60 but suffer large transmission losses due to 4WD, and are quite heavy. I think some of them are, what, 210 bhp or so? In a heavy car with high transmission loss, then I think its possible a clio could reel in one of the later shape models.
I own a 182, and have had a couple of run ins with WRX's, and to be honest theres not a lot in it usually. One bloke with a frog eyed Impreza was struggling to keep up on the straights. He caught up a bit in the corners though.
I've also had a race with a Focus RS, and while the Clios will not beat it, its surprisingly close up to 100 mph. After that though the RS will be much faster than the Clio.
Remember though Clios are B-road blasters, designed for twisty roads. They are not designed as high speed autobahn munchers. They are too noisy, fragile and lack the aerodynamics and gearing required for this type of job. For what its worth, they will illuminate the gear change light in top at around an indicated 145 mph or just over, this is about a genuine 140. At these speeds, the clios honestly do not feel that safe to me, very light at the front end, and high speed braking from a ton can be very scary, unsettling the back end as the front end attacks the tarmac, never mind adding another 40 mph to that!!!
Really, if you want a car for top speeds, why buy a car with the aerodynamics of a brick that's geared only to do 140? Put it on a B-road which is where it belongs, and enjoy its 0-100 performance, that's where it excels. If all you wanna do is go fast, just buy a chipped Octavia vRS (don't laugh, even a standard 178 bhp Octy can do 146 mph genuine) and be done with it.
Well actually the later WRX's are 225 BHP, the bug eyed ones are 215 BHP, and the latest ones are 230. While you are right in saying they suffer transmission losses like all 4WD cars, so do FWD cars, but not as much. And impreza's start off with a lot more than clio 172's. And they are not that heavy for a 4 door saloon, they have lightweight panels. I think the WRX will get to 100 MPH faster (@ 15.7 seconds) than a clio 172, which is at least 17 seconds I think.
What is it with Clio 172/182 drivers? I heard one in the pub last night telling his mate how he beat "one of dem new Aston DB9's" off the lights.
The Clio is a cheap hot hatch, and yes it's a damn good one. A sports car though, and fast in the overall scheme of performance cars, it is not.
It will also not get close to a well driven Focus RS, on twisties or straights. I have seen this demonstrated on many occasions. The turbo engine in the Focus just completely out-muscles it, and the Focus chassis outclasses it.
Mate, I have a 172 cup and 156mph, it's not gonna happen, I have had mine bouncing off the red line in 5th going 141mph. That's all it's gonna do!!
The fact is Clio 172 maybe not be quicker than a Subaru WRX on acceleration (0-60), but it will definitely beat them off the roundabouts; a rolling start is where it's at.
Go to www.scoobynet.co.uk and see how many WRX owners say that Clio 172/182 and Civic Type R's are faster than their cars.
A WRX is not as quick these days!! You lot are dreaming if you say the WRX is quick!
Sorry you're wrong, I've done it in a WRX, off the roundabouts and 0-60. Yes the 172 is quick, but able to beat a WRX? No. The figures will tell you the same whether it's 0-60, 30-70, 60-80, 80-100 whatever. Hot hatches are better than they used to be, but you need something like an Astra VXR/Megane 225/Leon 225 ot maybe a Civic Type R. If it's an STI or WRX PPP, forget it unless it's tuned or you have an EVO.
I have a 182 with a k&n fillter. I got 125 mph out of it but I think it could of done 145+
The Focus RS beats the 182 around the Topgear track, but not around the Fifth Gear track, so I would say they are pretty; even the Clio does 143mph. I own a CTR that will do 149mph.
The 172 would surpass the Impreza; when I say Impreza, I mean the Sport1 with no turbo and drums on the back.
The 172 is not as quick as a WRX, as I have proven many times in my own WRX. You are misleading people.
Similar power to weight ratios.
Clio 172 Sport has 165bhp per ton.
WRX has 169bhp per ton.
WRX is quicker to 60mph just, but equal to say 100mph.
Clio Sport handles better and is more agile.
They are very similar in performance in stock form. The WRX isn't very quick, the "STi" is quick.
You are misleading people.
The WRX gets to 60 in 5.6 seconds, that's more than a little quicker, and 100 in 15.7... what's the 172, at least 17. And don't even start on the handling, FWD hot hatch vs AWD rally inspired saloon? No chance. The two cars are in different leagues.
I agree with the Clio guy, the Impreza will be faster from a dig if both cars are launched without mercy, but the same 4WD system which helps get it off the line so fast saps power in the top end (of course losses are higher with power to 4wheels), which makes the Clio as fast on a longer stretch of road.
However both arguments are flawed because Clio sports and Impreza WRX's vary in power and weight depending on year and spec. Check out the site 'letstorquebhp.com' for individual figures.
As for handling, well grip is totally different to handling and I think the Impreza guy is mixing the two up. I think around a track Clio Sports would give base WRX's a run for their money thanks to such a chuckable and balanced chassis. The Top Gear lap times put the Impreza at 1:39 and the Clio 182 at 1:33.8; obviously this is just one track and one driver, but I'd be willing to bet the Clio would come out on top on most tracks with a good driver in either car. The Clio was actually pretty much bang in the middle of the STi Impreza at 1:28.2 and the base WRX, so not bad going for a cheap hot hatch with no rally pedigree.