Anyone ever owned/driven a Clio 182?

[MonkeyVR6 0]

Chaps,

 

I'm thinking of a change (yeah, I know...) and was wondering if anyone here, pref a VR6 owner, has also owned a Clio 182 and therefore could offer something of a comparision in performance/running costs/reliability etc.

 

Cheers.

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Get a copy of this month's PPC, there is a buying guide on them.

 

Can't believe they're as low as £2K at the moment!

[Henny 0]

used a mates for a while... very good on fuel, and very nimble and quick feeling... however they feel like the panels have been made out of coke cans and the interiors fall apart if you so much as fart in the wrong direction... :?

 

I wouldn't change from a German car to a Clio 182 as the knocks, rattles and bits falling off would do my nut, even if they are a hoot to drive...

[gregulate 0]

I owned a phase 1 172 - good but not great in summary. Basically a load of power at high-ish revs, and at low revs is easy around town, and good for fuel. Zero torque though - the engine just felt a bit weedy tbh.

 

Handling is good, but the phase 1 I had was a bit tempremental - I span it a couple of times at relatively low speeds but other times it felt as though grip was never ending. Eventually I just lost faith in the handling so didn't feel confident driving with any real enthusiasm.

 

Build quality was sh1t. Some ridiculous problems - for example (and this is purely what the garage told me and not 100% sure I believe it) the engine would somehow build up static which told the fuel computer not to let any fuel into the engine......so the engine would cut out / not start. All you had to do was touch the ht leads and recieve a minor static shock, low and behold the engine starts again......was told this is a common problem across the whole clio range. Might be worth researching a bit further.

 

Maintenance wise the engine is pretty solid, but the rest of the car isn't. With most french cars they are good for the first 5 years or so but then everything WILL break and all at the same time as well.

 

In short I can categorically say I will never own one again. I think I just got unlucky and bought a wrongun, as my mate has no real problems with his 182 cup.

 

Having owned a corrado VR6 there is no comparison and I'd have a VR everytime.

[Jim 2]

Mate of mine had a phase 1 Clio 172.. he loved it, and I thought it was pretty good fun. I think he had it for about two years and it was largely pretty reliable.. I only remember him having one problem (electrical unsurprisingly) where something which had been badly weatherproofed had suffered water ingress. Car wouldn't start but RAC came out and were about to sort it quite quickly.

 

The one thing I do remember about it was how bad it was at motorway speeds though thanks to short gear ratios... 80MPH on the motorway was VERY loud and buzzy - and quite tiring on longer runs.

[Kevin Bacon 5]

used a mates for a while... very good on fuel, and very nimble and quick feeling... however they feel like the panels have been made out of coke cans and the interiors fall apart if you so much as fart in the wrong direction... :?

 

I wouldn't change from a German car to a Clio 182 as the knocks, rattles and bits falling off would do my nut, even if they are a hoot to drive...

 

Apparently the 182 is thirsty. You're lucky to average much over 26 - 27mpg from them. Largely down to the lack of low end torque as already mentioned, meaning more revs are needed to get meaningful acceleration out of it (past 5K is where the fun begins apparently). As usual, 35+ mpg *is possible* under the usual

 

You're right about the build quality. The plastic wings are flimsy as hell and the feeling inside the car is cheap and as flimsy as the wings! But they don't cost a lot new and they're light cars, so it's horses for courses really.

[Majik 0]

I've driven a 182 had it for a few days, the build quality aint bad its better than Peugeot/Citroen but nowhere near as good as german rivals. It was a fun drive however there was two much power than the chasis could handle so uprated bushes and mounts would be a good idea.

These cars run hot and the engine just about fits in the engine so all the components on the engine deteriorate with the high tempratures Hoses, rubbers, Coilpacks etc.

[tandino 0]

All this talk of lack of torque at low rpms is crap,

I had a Ph1 172 and either you are expecting a stupid amount of grunt from a 2 litre engine or something seriously was up with your cars.

My 172 was easily as fast as my Corrado low down and top end, sure there might be times when the VR would pull better at low rpm/high gear scenario's but hey who drives around labouring their engine?...

And 26-27mpg average, do me a favour..

I averaged 35mpg out of mine driving to work and back, 40+ on the motorway was easily achievable.

Interiors are pretty hard wearing, usually the steering wheel falls apart but i thought mine was pretty solid, electrics are a bit hit and miss however.

They are great fun but it just wasn't 'me' and thats why i sold it...

 

And too much power for the chassis, well thats the first time ive ever heard that from what is pretty commonly known as one of the best handling fwd cars made, you must know something we dont??

Sure driving a tired one with shagged OEM engine mounts will not help but come on, they will run rings round most FWD cars chassis wise...

[cdem 0]

Handling is good, but the phase 1 I had was a bit tempremental - I span it a couple of times at relatively low speeds but other times it felt as though grip was never ending. Eventually I just lost faith in the handling so didn't feel confident driving with any real enthusiasm.

.

 

 

x2...managed to write one off :brickwall:

[tandino 0]

Ran out of talent?

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Are you deliberately trying to antagonise people are you always such a c0ck?

[tandino 0]

Are you deliberately trying to antagonise people are you always such a c0ck?

 

My how big of you.

I forgot about this place,

Having actually owned a car and putting across a point that is not from a friends friends Uncle's Mother is frowned upon on here.

Ive owned a 172 and i find it laughable to read such a load of crap about them not handling, i guess all the road testers and journo's got it completely wrong.

A shagged example thats wearing shite tyres and worn shocks will throw you in a ditch as quick as anything else but does that mean they are all like that?, and they are certainly not the sort of cars that will do so unless your driving like an idiot of there is something wrong with it or its run on budget tyres etc.

And if you want to insult me on here Kev,dont do it via a keyboard, its not big and its not clever.

[OllieVR6 0]

Yo, well I can't comment on power or handling (well maybe a little on handling) but I have a 2003 Clio 1.2 as my daily and one thing I will always defend in the Clio (and other Renaults as my dad has a Laguna) is the so called 'shit build quality' everyone on the internet always bangs on about. I have had the car since new, covered 120,000 miles and it's still fine. There are 2 rattles that I know of, both fixable if I could be bothered and the only thing that has ever gone wrong was last year at about 115k the coil pack needed replacing (and it wasn't even expensive!).

 

Now compared to my VR6 which has similar miles - ok so twice as old - easily has MORE than twice as many rattles and broken parts on it.

 

I can't imagine the 172/182 'build quality' is worse, in fact likely better, than my 1.2 so as far as I'm concerned the build quality on my Clio is as good as it's rivals!

[Kevin Bacon 5]

Are you deliberately trying to antagonise people are you always such a c0ck?

 

My how big of you.

I forgot about this place,

Having actually owned a car and putting across a point that is not from a friends friends Uncle's Mother is frowned upon on here.

Ive owned a 172 and i find it laughable to read such a load of crap about them not handling, i guess all the road testers and journo's got it completely wrong.

A shagged example thats wearing **** tyres and worn shocks will throw you in a ditch as quick as anything else but does that mean they are all like that?, and they are certainly not the sort of cars that will do so unless your driving like an idiot of there is something wrong with it or its run on budget tyres etc.

And if you want to insult me on here Kev,dont do it via a keyboard, its not big and its not clever.

 

Welcome back :D

I understand all of that, but suggesting that the other chap is a bad driver because he "ditched it" came across a tad harsh, or maybe it's just me :shrug:

I asked the question because I've seen your other posts on here and they're a lot more laid back, so it seemed out of character and deliberately antaganistic. If i've got you all wrong, then I apologise.

[Pat_McCrotch 0]

On another note. My mate had a 1.2 Clio and although the interior is typically French it was mechanically indestructable. His Dad is still running around in it after 6 years, good memories of that car :lol:

 

Suprised people on here are saying it's a bad handler. I always thought that was it's saving grace? The amount of 182's I used to see on Track Days in 2006 was rediculous.

[Majik 0]

And too much power for the chassis, well thats the first time ive ever heard that from what is pretty commonly known as one of the best handling fwd cars made, you must know something we dont??

Sure driving a tired one with shagged OEM engine mounts will not help but come on, they will run rings round most FWD cars chassis wise...

Well i the one i drove was a Y reg back in 2005 about 4 years old, im not saying the handling was bad infact it was very good, but it did seem to have massive amounts of torque steer even on motorway speeds in 5th gear when you put the foot down.

[tandino 0]

Are you deliberately trying to antagonise people are you always such a c0ck?

 

My how big of you.

I forgot about this place,

Having actually owned a car and putting across a point that is not from a friends friends Uncle's Mother is frowned upon on here.

Ive owned a 172 and i find it laughable to read such a load of crap about them not handling, i guess all the road testers and journo's got it completely wrong.

A shagged example thats wearing **** tyres and worn shocks will throw you in a ditch as quick as anything else but does that mean they are all like that?, and they are certainly not the sort of cars that will do so unless your driving like an idiot of there is something wrong with it or its run on budget tyres etc.

And if you want to insult me on here Kev,dont do it via a keyboard, its not big and its not clever.

 

Welcome back :D

I understand all of that, but suggesting that the other chap is a bad driver because he "ditched it" came across a tad harsh, or maybe it's just me :shrug:

I asked the question because I've seen your other posts on here and they're a lot more laid back, so it seemed out of character and deliberately antaganistic. If i've got you all wrong, then I apologise.

 

 

Kev

 

In my experience cars don't just fall off the road themselves,

To write a car like a Clio 172 off your either driving too fast for the conditions, driving too fast for your ability or finally driving too fast for the ability of the car.

The third option is the only one that is questionably outside the drivers control and when i say questionably i mean that if you don't know when your getting upto the limit of what your driving you shouldn't be pushing it that hard in the first place hence me throwing in the 'ran out of talent?' comment...

Thats is not suggesting anyone is a bad driver (we've all done it), merely lifting the blame solely from a car which is known for having great handling, personally i fail to see how you can write a car like that off on the public road and blame the handling...

Sure you fit shite ditchfinder tyres or lower one so far it has no compression available to the suspension then yes maybe but thats not the fault of the car is it?.

Im just giving an opinion to the OP as someone who has owned one, ive owned,driven, worked on and track'd shite loads of different marques over the years - i would bet more than about 99% of this forum and im not what id call the typical VW blinkered individual that sits on a lot of VW forums, sure i love and own the Marque and have done for 20 years but i will also add my 2 penneth when i feel strongly about what i read especially when i don't agree, if that makes me a C0ck in your eyes well thats down to you but to sit behind your keyboard and write that about me who you've never met me before i think is pathetic.

As i see it this is a discussion forum, thats what its here for but i still think your bang out of order...

 

And Majik, something was very, very wrong with the car you drove, they dont just torque steer like that at all.

[Henny 0]

Having thrashed the knackers off my mates standard 182 I realised just how bad the handling was on my Corrado G60 and upgraded to coil-overs that were then corner-weighted... then he wanted to get the same done to his after driving mine!

 

They do handle, but yeah, the snap from under to oversteer is a little un-nerving and slightly more difficult to predict than on a Corrado... I enjoyed it and thought it handled well, and he was the only owner of his from new and it was treated well, but also thrashed senseless on a couple of track days! Stick ditch-finder-generic tyres on any car and it'll screw the handling, so you've got to take the car reviews of older vehicles with a large pinch of salt... ;)

[corozin 0]

I know someone who has one and I can tell you that having been out on a trackday against one they are considerably faster (stock) than any Corrado.

The Gordini racing (flat) blue is the colour to have.

[cdem 0]

Wish i hadnt have said anything now!

 

Yea i agree they do handle very well, never said they didnt :)