Clio 200 - 2017

[Raptor6767]

If he didn't notice the difference with the cams than it might be the timing problem.
I had that problem at first.

 

[Chris_200CUP]

Ahh fair enough.

 

[TB Rich]

Here was your graph Litchy, 210bhp and 175ftlb - I don't know how you can say zero real world difference? For all intents and purposes it's a very similar graph to mine when at RST.

However I wonder if yours was perhaps reverting itself overtime like mine was? With the Shricks being a wilder cam I suspect the MAP sensor was having just as much of a hard time as mine and with the way the Sagem applies closed-loop trims globally it could have been happening on yours..... I didn't feel mine go from 215bhp at RST slowly back down to ~200bhp when the standalone replaced it. Stock ECU is just a pile of wank.

 

[Chris_200CUP]

I'll stick to my 402s after seen that graph lol

like the North Sea

 

[litchy]

Here was your graph Litchy, 210bhp and 175ftlb - I don't know how you can say zero real world difference? For all intents and purposes it's a very similar graph to mine when at RST.

However I wonder if yours was perhaps reverting itself overtime like mine was? With the Shricks being a wilder cam I suspect the MAP sensor was having just as much of a hard time as mine and with the way the Sagem applies closed-loop trims globally it could have been happening on yours..... I didn't feel mine go from 215bhp at RST slowly back down to ~200bhp when the standalone replaced it. Stock ECU is just a pile of wank.

I can say it cause it really didn't. This is always the issue when you look on graphs against actually driving cars. I drove the car along with standard car at evo triangle, there was nothing between the cars. As we know, RR are only part of the story. Agree though, there's more power in an 80's pc than the ecu. For this reason is why it just makes little sense in fitting CAMs anyway along with most mods tbh. I stand by the fact, my car drove the best actually standard. Everything else was just noise.

 

[Chris_200CUP]

Well i totally disagree. For me, I can feel the difference in how car drives on the road in every aspect . And in standard form they are very poor imo. Even with just a
map they improve no end. Think had enough cars and modified enough of them to tell
if something works or how it drives.


And as as for standard car keeping up with you and been no
differnce comes down to
other factors aswell.

 

[TB Rich]

Then I wouldn't be surprised if your ECU was as I said slowly reverting then. When a standard car dyno's about 185-190bhp and about 155ftlb at RST, then no way you'll not feel 20-25bhp and 20ftlb back to back. I know the gearing on mine changes things but I am pretty sure it would be a full on rape-a-thon against a stock car. My car stock bored me to tears frankly.
Not sure how you can say your car drove best standard either, more evidence then that Shricks likely need a standalone to run properly in that case.

 

[litchy]

Well i totally disagree. For me, I can feel the difference in how car drives on the road in every aspect . And in standard form they are very poor imo. Even with just a
map they improve no end. Think had enough cars and modified enough of them to tell
if something works or how it drives.


And as as for standard car keeping up with you and been no
differnce comes down to
other factors aswell.

Each to their own I guess and I'm not trying to convince you otherwise, I'm just talking from my own experience and my car rather than generalising about every car. Also rather than getting into 'your dad being bigger than my dad', I think at 50 and equally having had a couple of cars, I considered that there are other factors when driving against the standard car but generally from my own experience the cost of schricks, plus fitting and then mapping (whether you belts need doing or not) equates to £1500+. To see £100 per 1 bhp and the difference on the road wasn't night and day especially when your expecting the absolute wank ecu to make sense of the changes, was the worst mod I've done to a car to date.....but like I said, each to their own.

 

[litchy]

Then I wouldn't be surprised if your ECU was as I said slowly reverting then. When a standard car dyno's about 185-190bhp and about 155ftlb at RST, then no way you'll not feel 20-25bhp and 20ftlb back to back. I know the gearing on mine changes things but I am pretty sure it would be a full on rape-a-thon against a stock car. My car stock bored me to tears frankly.
Not sure how you can say your car drove best standard either, more evidence then that Shricks likely need a standalone to run properly in that case.

My car standard made 196bhp at RST. Again I can only talk about my experience but with these cars, it's not the amount of power but getting it where you need it. The engine for me lacks low down torque and the benefit of the cams were pushing it higher up the rev range where the car needs the power the least. I just found against a decent stock car, you need the right road in order to see the difference between the two cars. For me it just excerebated the problem with the car in standard form having to drive it like you stole it in order to benefit from the power.

Yep, in my experience it drove better standard, and nothing to do with the Schricks. I just think it's a more honest car standard and the thousands of pounds I spent trying to get it to go faster, ultimately didn't improve the driving experience, just made the same issues more apparent.

The funny thing is I went to 'how fast' at Bedford on here a few years ago, and watched 2 members standard engined 200's but well set up suspension and brakes drive within seconds of an Audi TTS, told me a lot about theses cars. No different than me sitting next to Josh cook in a Clio cup car at Oulton, there's not much wrong with the standard engine, it's down to the person holding the steering wheel to get the most out of them.

I took the easier option and just Megged it.....but like I say, each to their own.

 

[Chris_200CUP]

Yes and that's the issue. The cams you had pushed the torque up the
rev range , Gave you a torque spike where it peaks if you like
then it just tailed off. OK I may have 10flb lower but the
power spread it a lot better through Rev range and more
flat. Graph is really smooth.

The ecu may been struggling even on the rollers with yours too why he graph was up and down through Rev range. Who knows


One of these cars well set up will upset alot of cars It shouldn't!. Which has been proven at Track days. That's best thing about these cars.

At at oulton last time there was a silver 197 - on the straights the difference was clear ro
see with just remap and exhaust.


1500 quid is alot of money I agree - I even said pervious post its a lot money for the gains. But if
having the cambelt done and want get abit extra out car have the option to drop cams in or if want a extra edge on track or reached a limit with the car. I wouldn't go drop a set cams in if its your daily to go too work as yes that be pointless.

Going off what rich discovered with wilder cams / ECU and what you have said the only option to go for is the 402s. Least know ECU can cope


End day everyone has different opinions / experiences.

 

[Chris_200CUP]

Anyway back to build thread - thinking of ordering the powerflex front anti roll bar bushes. Has anyone fitted these ?

 

[TB Rich]

Probably bought the wrong car then litchy, a fairly plump NA 2.0 hatch tuned from the factory to about 100hp/litre was only ever going to drive one way

Chris you got vibratechnics engine mounts yet? I fitted them a couple of weeks ago, made a really tangible difference that I wasn't expecting to be honest. My old mounts had done 40k and I already had the vibra lower link and powerflex upper link bush.

 

[Chris_200CUP]

I've got the powerflex engine mounts to go on. Should
left with with Mark when did the cambelt but totally forgot lol.

Found as aswell can get a uprated front anti
roll bar. The cup cars use a slightly thicker bar. Maybe summit else to
look into

 

[TB Rich]

Don't fit the thicker front anti roll bar on your setup, you'll want much stiffer rear end before doing that. The cup cars use 130Nm rear springs

Have a search on here I'm sure I put a useful post as to why you don't want one...I'm out currently just on phone now.

 

[Chris_200CUP]

True, someone had fitted one but no sure what suspension he's running. Won't be cup racer set up. Ill
just order set of bushes for standard bar.

 

[Chris_200CUP]

Few years too late but finally got a GoPro! Can get some track action filmed now!!

 

[krash67]

Anyway back to build thread - thinking of ordering the powerflex front anti roll bar bushes. Has anyone fitted these ?

i did a few moons ago. Unfortunately you have to drop the subframe to get easier access as well as being able to rotate the roll bar clamp forward to remove it from a retaining slot in the subframe,once you've removed the clamp bolt. . Maybe better to wait until you have to drop the subframe for something else. Although I have got this down to fine art!!

 

[Chris_200CUP]

Any noticeable difference once on bud?

 

[krash67]

To be honest I don't know, because I never really "drove" the car before i did the mod. For a few quid I would change the drop links at the same time, not with with OEM but rose joints and link rod.:giggle:

 

[Raptor6767]

I have a Cup Racer 22mm ARB and it's great. Felt less understeer when fitted. It turned out to be a great mod.

At the same time I've installed a front UR strut bar, and later on rear UR ARB and strut bar too (but haven't noticed any difference due to the engine brake in period - didnt't drive the car hard). Had KW V3 installed before that.