197 test drive
- Thread starter Ev0
- Start date
Biohazard said:
Ive got a Clio 16v with the same engine, the williams 2.0 as standard will only hit 136mph at full tilt from the factory. It might show 140mph indicated but it wont be going that fast.
Unless you have modifications? Which i dont think you have seeing as you said it had 137bhp.
Acolyte said:
Clio is slower, comes with different box ratios. I have had 6 of these cars and one clio valver, and the none ******** have all bounced off the limiter in 5th... with the 19 JC box this equates to 20mph per 1Krpm. So bouncing it off limiter at 7K equates exactly to 140Mph. You can tell the boxes are different as you need to shift to third to hit 60 in the clio, not in the 19.
I am not an idiot, I don't go with the speedo, or even the tacho both over/under read. When it bounces I know I've hit 7K, and when in 5th that is 140.
Yes the 19 was the first car ever to recieve 4 star (or at least I'm 95% it was 4, if not it was 3 but the first to get that if so)
lol what makes you think safty ratings are anything new?
Acolyte said:
well I don't like to say really, as I've never had it rolled so coming out with "oh yeah its 155bhp blah blah" just feels silly to me.. but the ports have been smoothed off a bit and matched to mans, cone filter, replaced most the ignition system, decat, one interior seat and four plexiglass windows along with Renault 21 Turbo brakes shod with Toyo Proxes. It would wipe the floor with the 197... standard would be more tricky but the 197 certainly wouldn't pull away... not with it being so lardy
Biohazard said:
The official 0-60 time is 8.2 seconds. I'm guessing you've obtained the time of 7.2 seconds yourself, in which case you should really compare official figures. It's quite possible that Evo magazine or similar will record a faster time for the new Clio.
Edit: Just seen that your 19 is modified, so you're definitely not comparing like with like. So the Clio isn't 60bhp greater in power, it may only be 35-40, so you can't expect as much performance gain.
Last edited:
Axeboy said:Since Evo has driven both, maybe he can shed some light.
Not that im disputing performance. Just reality
lol whatever man, you think a 'test drive' is knowing a car and its exact capabilites? lol
Why do you struggle to grasp the very simple idea that regards of age and price, it comes down to power/weight ratio and handling.... and that clio ain't doing so well.
When / if they do a Cup Version yes, why not hopefully it would be at least a bit better! I myself have been looking to pick up a 172 Cup, so don't get me down as a Clio/New car basher! I'm not, and I also sit in reality mate
Fusion said:
yes yes yes come out with something new why don't you lol. Phase 1 19 16V is 7.3-7.2. The phase 2 19 isn't worth typing about.
I have seen myself do a 7.1 at crail (different car not so modded)..
I have videos somewhere showing 1916V ph1 doing a 7.2 standard.
Associate
I think the Astra GTE (156bhp/145lb/ft) struggled to hit 7.2 to 60. Weight Id guess is also less than the 19.
found this looking about, 19 16V chammade humping an Audi A3 1.8 Turbo 150bhp... not what I'm after but I will find the proof!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=f5GcgqbWNwg&mode=related&search=acceleration
http://youtube.com/watch?v=f5GcgqbWNwg&mode=related&search=acceleration
Associate
Biohazard,
How the hell can you think a car is better than another one by comparing 0-60 times? lol . 0-60 times mean absolutly nothing unless your one of them losers that goes drag racing every weekend
from 50-100mph i would imagine the 197 to be v.quick
How the hell can you think a car is better than another one by comparing 0-60 times? lol . 0-60 times mean absolutly nothing unless your one of them losers that goes drag racing every weekend
from 50-100mph i would imagine the 197 to be v.quick
I got low 7s on one of those gtech thingies to 60 in my p2 19 16v, they aren't that bad
The 19 was a ncie car and handled well, the 197 is more of a modern 19 imho in the way it drives, plus you get the creature comforts Standard seats on the 197 whlst being nice to sit in look a bit pants, would have been nice to see alcantara/leather combo again. Recaros are nice option but expensive.
As fo rthe 19 not hitting 140 cos a Clio can't, the 19 has better aerodynamics than the Clio which would help things, has a low drag coeficient iirc.
I've always thought this, the advantage I could feel in this car was it just pulled in every gear. On mine if you stuck it in fifth low end it takes a while to get going (not that you'd normally be doing that but for example). Would need to drive one for longer to know if it was a real benifit or just annoying!
The 19 was a ncie car and handled well, the 197 is more of a modern 19 imho in the way it drives, plus you get the creature comforts
Standard seats on the 197 whlst being nice to sit in look a bit pants, would have been nice to see alcantara/leather combo again. Recaros are nice option but expensive.As fo rthe 19 not hitting 140 cos a Clio can't, the 19 has better aerodynamics than the Clio which would help things, has a low drag coeficient iirc.
Jonny69 said:
I've always thought this, the advantage I could feel in this car was it just pulled in every gear. On mine if you stuck it in fifth low end it takes a while to get going (not that you'd normally be doing that but for example). Would need to drive one for longer to know if it was a real benifit or just annoying!
Last edited:
Soldato
By taking more than one variable into account per chance?Biohazard said: