diesel "200" ?

[Foxspeed]

with fuel going through the roof on price.......would you buy a 200 diesel ?

it couldnt be called a "200" so lets say renaultsport clio 175dci

say 45mpg and 150g/co2 and £1000 more than the petrol 200

0-60 7.8s and 140mph

option of a "twin-clutch" gearbox

would you buy it....

 

[Mike Roberts]

No.

FIN.

EDIT: I'll elaborate. Derv lumps are heavy, it'd ruin the dynamics of the car and having such a narrow range would be a nightmare rowing up and down the 'box.

Fast diesels have their place, but not in mini hot hatches. VW have the right idea with their little 1.4 twinchargers, people are getting 230BHP out of those things and they still get outstanding MPG and cost bugger all in road tax.

Diesel is getting dearer, diesel cars on the whole are getting more expensive than the petrol equivalent... it takes a lot of miles to make it worth your while, which is why it makes sense in big heavy cars where MPG is vastly different between the two fuels.

Little F/I cars are the way forward.

 

[Jasey]

Plenty other diesels already out there.

Besides a diesel engine would shake most of the parts off the 200d

 

[slime]

...I would have an open mind on this I think....would certainly try one out before buying a new car generally....might need to have a 7 speed box to account for the short rev range....

 

[Graeme GTR]

drove the megane 175, as nice as it was it wasnt a patch on the 225. Although the torque was awesome and a remap would be a big improvement.

 

[Jonny_197]

Nope...never...non...NO!

Cars like this weren't designed to have economy in mind (they certainly don't with depreciation) but more for a fun experience.

The only way I can see it working is if Renault gets taken over by Audi and they develop a quattro diesel engine for the 200!!!

 

[Foxspeed]

...I would have an open mind on this I think....would certainly try one out before buying a new car generally....might need to have a 7 speed box to account for the short rev range....

i have now put that as an "option" :bat:

 

[Foxspeed]

No.

FIN.

EDIT: I'll elaborate. Derv lumps are heavy, it'd ruin the dynamics of the car and having such a narrow range would be a nightmare rowing up and down the 'box.

Fast diesels have their place, but not in mini hot hatches. VW have the right idea with their little 1.4 twinchargers, people are getting 230BHP out of those things and they still get outstanding MPG and cost bugger all in road tax.

Diesel is getting dearer, diesel cars on the whole are getting more expensive than the petrol equivalent... it takes a lot of miles to make it worth your while, which is why it makes sense in big heavy cars where MPG is vastly different between the two fuels.

Little F/I cars are the way forward.

you not seen fiats 1.3 diesel......looks like a motor bike engine its that small - alot of modern diesels arent cast iron anymore there are a few all alloy jobbies about - dont think the weight penalty is that great now

 

[Mike Roberts]

Ahh yes, that's true..

But still, I wouldn't even give one a second look. Same as I wouldn't give any other Clio a second look.

 

[clio200cup]

i said about 6 years ago that manufacturers will start using small capacity forced induction engines
but no, i hate diesels, so defiently not for me.

stu.

 

[PB.200]

I would definitely!!

I have owned a fabia VRS in the past and loved it!

 

[jase]

i bought the 197 based on looks.
if they could make one that looks as good but cheaper to run then a big fat yes from me.

 

[PoweredAnt]

Sort out the weight distribution then give me a MR 200d...!

 

[Arran]

I'd have a drive if I could afford it. If it handled nearly as wel and was nearly as quick, I think you would have to test drive it to see if it was worth it. Thing is though, when you calculate how many milea you would have to do to recover the higher list price and higher fuel price, petrol's are usually cheaper! Although you do generally get the higher list price back when you sell.

 

[BenW]

If they could make it as much fun as the 197/200 then I'd buy one, unfortunately though I don't think diesels will ever be as exciting

 

[Paul]

TBH I just couldn't do it!

I think it defeats the objective of the car and gives a 'wannabe' attitude to the lesser model.

 

[GrumpyTwig]

Not necessarily a diesel 200, but the the clio range could do with a more powerful diesel.

My old 86 DCI felt drastically slow and I doubt the 106 (which they've stopped doing) was much better. I was riding a sub 4 second 0-60 bike at the time but even still.....

 

[Foxspeed]

Not necessarily a diesel 200, but the the clio range could do with a more powerful diesel.

My old 86 DCI felt drastically slow and I doubt the 106 (which they've stopped doing) was much better. I was riding a sub 4 second 0-60 bike at the time but even still.....

i had a clio dci86...never found it "lacking"

also had a megane dci 106 - was just brilliant - performance economy :thumbup:

 

[daz]

I wouldn't buy one, for alot of the reasons already highlighted by Mike.

High revving NA petrol over a turbo DERV anyday! :thumbup:

 

[GrumpyTwig]

i had a clio dci86...never found it "lacking"

also had a megane dci 106 - was just brilliant - performance economy :thumbup:

0-60 in 12.7 seconds supposedly for the 86, don't get me wrong I loved the car hence why I bought a new Clio but it lacked any real feel of power.