7th Aug 2001, 06:36

The guy before didn't say which M3 he toasted, it could've been the older one - around the 7 seconds mark to 60 so therefore he would have toasted it don't you think? As the Clio 172 does the dash in 6.6, it's the hottest hatch you can buy. So there.

24th Sep 2001, 10:09

Think before you speak - A road race is not about 0-100km/hr and then on to top speed in a straight line. The "172" is easier to hammer off the line and has excellent in gear acceleration. Here's what I mean:

3 cars: Audi S3 / Subaru WRX 2001 / 172

Pull off and hold the 172 at 1500rpm in first, the WRX and S3 hold station at the same speed to the 172, NOW FLOOR IT > S3 pulls ahead, then the 172, then the WRX. S3 stays ahead till it slots 3rd gear, then 172 pulls a car length ahead leaving the WRX in 3rd place. Positions on the road now - 172 1st, S3 2nd, WRX 3rd..

Positions are held till the WRX hits 170km/hr. And it then overtakes the S3 and starts coming on the 172.

We tried the same on road race with the WRX at 3600rpm (its max torque) in 1st gears (all) and the 172 still jumped ahead. Interesting to note the 172 baulks into 3rd when new (under 1500kms), but the shift loosens after that which makes on road results even more noticable.

The turbo cars had a slightly better advantage when repeating this going up a hill, showing its torque advantage.

These "tests" where done between friends, and repeated by 2 different 172's showing consistency of power between 172's. All cars were standard.

These runs where also done at 2000m above sea level where the naturally aspirated cars lost around 15 % power!

Wait till the 172's clock the required 3000km's (odo) to loosen up.


27th Sep 2001, 18:55

I am buying my 172 on the 17th October and I can't wait. I borrowed a 172 for a day and 'wow' is all I have to say. I used to work for a car company delivering Imprezas, 306's, 106's etc and have never driven a car quite like this one. My brother has a Rover 200 BRM and he keeps up around corners to the point that maybe he could have passed me, but on the straights - hmmm.

I had a head-to-head with a BMW 330ci and I couldn't believe that I actually edged past him! Just goes to show that power-to-weight is important, with the 172 having around 167 bhp per tonne. I was extremely impressed by this little monster and am counting the days!!!

I currently own a VW Scirocco and this will be a serious step up in performance for me, let's hope that the build quality will match my VW.

Are there any good performance mods available for the 172? I would like to possibly change that pea-shooter exhaust for something that proves that it has one, also I heard that the rear bumper can melt slightly from this exhaust set up?

Anyway, that's enough rabbiting from me. See you all on the road after Oct 24th!


26th Oct 2001, 13:10

What are you on about? "Hold it at the revs and floor it". Not exactly real world is it?

I have been in both a 172 and a WRX and there is no way a 172 can beat a WRX in a straight line. Just read the flipping specs.

172 0-60 in 6.9 seconds

WRX 0-60 in 5.4 seconds.

I have raced 172's in my Integra Type-R and granted if they take me by surprise and I'm not in the V-TEC zone I lose, but when I'm in the zone I leave them for dust.

The 172 has crap gear ratios as well, anything over a 100mph takes an age.

A 172 is a storming little hatch, but that's where its stays, in the hot hatch arena. Stay out of the way of the big boys.

24th Nov 2001, 03:51

Hey, I realise that you used to own a Golf GTI before this. Is this the 1.8 turbo? Because I'm moving from an Audi A3 turbo to a Renault Clio Sport and am wondering about other things besides performance such as the smoothness and refinement of the engine.

Is the engine quiet at highway cruising at 100kmph? Does it make excessive noise compared to the 1.8t?

Thanks guys.

15th Dec 2001, 12:49

Hi there Mr. Integra.

I previously worked for a Subaru garage delivering and preparing new and used Impreza Turbos (amongst others) and the WRX Impreza (new shape) is a good, but not as fast as it says. This new shape has lost the in-yer-face turbo 'push' that the previous model had, and the new one gives a smooth power delivery, and just feels much slower. As for a comparison between the 172 and the new WRX - well I have proved it to myself a good friend, and an owner of a new WRX that my 172 can toast it. A young guy, like myself (I'm 21) was driving the WRX, as we raced around the roundabout that leads onto a slip road and onto a dual carriage way. He was in front, I stayed behind him here until we reached the slip road where I was equal with him all the way until the dual carriage way - as I reached 4th gear (flat out) I realised I was gaining on him, and had to use the outside lane - overtaking him whilst changing gear on the rev limiter at 121 mph, slotted my car into 5th and carried on gaining as my friend waved a friendly 'see ya later' through the passenger window. The WRX driver was NOT impressed! but admitted I beat him fair and square. It just goes to show that power to weight is important as the previous guy was saying and YES the 172 can easily mix it with the 'big boys' - EASY!

It would be interesting to race an Integra Type-R, with it being a smaller engine with only 130 lb/ft of torque. The 2.0 172 doesn't have to be caned to get the most out of it, it has more torque (148 lb/ft) and that's where it counts in acceleration. I reckon the race would be VERY close, and in-gear tests would result in Clio moving ahead first. There is a Top Gear review, directly comparing the 172 and the Integra Type-R (mixing with the big boys?!!! ;-) ) and a Ford Racing Puma. They rated the Clio 172 the best out of all 3. Read the review my friend. Even Vicki Butler's verdict was in high favour of the Clio! Yes the Integra has lots of power, but just not enough torque... so please don't go saying that the 172 isn't good, because it blatently is! I think you'd be mighty embarressed in a race my friend, having probably spent considerably much more money on yours than I have spent on mine (came with 1100 miles, no typo and cost me £11,400, it's the 2001 model in silver but not the new shape).

See you on the dual carriageway - if you dare! :-)


12th Jul 2002, 06:34

What are these guys talking about?

Road cars are not for racing on roads. Grow up. It is dangerous.

I have a Clio Sport and I like it. When nobody's looking, I like to thrash it through the gears and it is quick, but the beauty of this car is the balance and handling around corners... I can't get it to miss around a corner.

I wish... the wheels had been 16 instead of 15 and the gear change to 3rd was a bit smoother... otherwise, if you can get one go for it.

Previous: 205 GTi Golf GTi both great fun, but this is better.