Renaultsport R27 0465
- Thread starter John Gordon
- Start date
John Gordon
Paid Member
Yeah, that's what I thought when planning it. I think I should be able to drive around the pops and bangs.
John Gordon
Paid Member
Fitted my turbo smart actuator today. Spot the washered up longer bolt. The original got lost in the abyss at the back of the engine.
Also started fitting these to get more airs in. Need to go get some bonding this afternoon.
The design is not so great on the 80mm duct. It fouls the headlight so will require trimming. My rad is also bigger and has deflectors which block my entry for hosing. So, some strategic manipulation will be needed here.
Also started fitting these to get more airs in. Need to go get some bonding this afternoon.
The design is not so great on the 80mm duct. It fouls the headlight so will require trimming. My rad is also bigger and has deflectors which block my entry for hosing. So, some strategic manipulation will be needed here.
John Gordon
Paid Member
I bought a couple of new cameras to start doing multi cam replay. Both were not setup correctly and died fairly quickly since the ciggy lighter was not plugged in on reassembly.
This was one of the better ones, but the white balance needs adjusting.
Totally raw. Fun little play with a white BMW from 18:15 ish onwards.
Only really sharing so you can hear what it sounds like now.
Excuse my potty mouth, but I'm from the north and common as muck.
This was one of the better ones, but the white balance needs adjusting.
Totally raw. Fun little play with a white BMW from 18:15 ish onwards.
Only really sharing so you can hear what it sounds like now.
Excuse my potty mouth, but I'm from the north and common as muck.
Wasn’t overly noisy. Might just be the mic on the camera though.
Your Clio was sweeping past most things which was great to see. Plus the track day rules are clearly different on the continent! At one point you went through the middle of two cars on the pit straight
John Gordon
Paid Member
It's arrived and it looks pretty good to be fair. Not offered it up as yet.
As soon as I do ill get some pics.
John Gordon
Paid Member
Wasn’t overly noisy. Might just be the mic on the camera though.
Your Clio was sweeping past most things which was great to see. Plus the track day rules are clearly different on the continent! At one point you went through the middle of two cars on the pit straight
No, its not too bad.
Trackday rules here seem a lot more lax. I found the first few sessions quote disconcerting. Eg, safety briefing is usually an A4 piece of paper if that.
I enjoy it now though, just got to have eyes everywhere
John Gordon
Paid Member
RSRowe
Paid Member
John Gordon
Paid Member
Caroline, (yea really, that's the name of my Clio) has done around 100 laps of Zandvoort since the conversion.
I really want to give an honest account of the conversion for people who are thinking of going ahead, whether for a track car or a road car.
Also, I want to dispel a few myths that I've come across along the way on mods.
The first thing I've learned is a painful thing to accept. But I'm going to throw it out there. The Clio is not as good in the twisty stuff as we like to think. Well, it's subjective really. What are you comparing it to? In its class, it's top. But even an E46 has a more efficient platform for a track based toy.
The Clio outperforms itself for sure, but once you start modding like for like, you need a bigger bag of skill to start making the difference. Due to my relatively small bag of skill, this became evident quite quickly. I'm hoping a push to 235 section may help, but the most efficient track weapon sleeper the Clio is not unless you're Ragnotti.
The Megane engine. Each of us has slight variations on our engine configs and programming. I miss the NA. I really do. Car is faster no doubt, in fact, I can tell you it's around 3 seconds a lap faster around Zandvoort.
Power delivery is just no good for me as mine stands. It's flat towards the top. The curves on the graphs are normal for a "stage 2" map and since fitting the actuator it's stronger at the top. But the Megane engine was set how many French turbo cars we're designed from the Peugeot XU10s and maybe earlier..they try to replicate a budget v6. They love their leggy torque type engines to waft around French lanes with a chassis capable of stable cornering so they don't spill their wine in the bends as they drive one-handed (hence the torque, no hands for gear changes and why Clio and meg are auto now)
Clio 3 is about wringing the kneck out of the engine and having a chassis more than capable of dealing with that and the most ham-fisted of pilots. Not coughing and sputtering at 6k onwards.
And this is my next point. To get the 225 engine up to spec is work. Yes cheapest starting point, but avoid it. They are old and slightly off point. If you're going Megane conversion, start with 250 engine. Already Renault addressed the lazy v6 feel and gave you some more revs to play with and it's way more eager to get there.
To get the 225 engine to perform as well you need a 250 turbo, 630 injectors and a remap. Then if you listen to the internet you've got a ticking time bomb as the torques will convert the rods to Scientology and so they shall do their best to leave the block to join the flock. (I hate saying this, famous last words. My 230 lump has had the shit kicked out of it with 330+ torques since conversion...touches all the wood)
Hot. Engine temps are great. Basically, I can drive on track until my fuel level gets to the point where I get fuel surge coming out of the banked corner before the straight at Zandvoort. Around 30 laps. Heat soak is a big problem though. All the cats in the neighbourhood love my car, warm for days. Problem is getting the air out.
Fuel system. It's pants when you combine 225+197/200. Needs changing. I've had fuel surge cuts on track several times on the track. The fuel rail on the 225 is terrible and the weaker Clio pump exacerbates this.
TLDR: 225 engine sounds attractive at face value on cost. In reality, you're better starting with 250 engine.
I really want to give an honest account of the conversion for people who are thinking of going ahead, whether for a track car or a road car.
Also, I want to dispel a few myths that I've come across along the way on mods.
The first thing I've learned is a painful thing to accept. But I'm going to throw it out there. The Clio is not as good in the twisty stuff as we like to think. Well, it's subjective really. What are you comparing it to? In its class, it's top. But even an E46 has a more efficient platform for a track based toy.
The Clio outperforms itself for sure, but once you start modding like for like, you need a bigger bag of skill to start making the difference. Due to my relatively small bag of skill, this became evident quite quickly. I'm hoping a push to 235 section may help, but the most efficient track weapon sleeper the Clio is not unless you're Ragnotti.
The Megane engine. Each of us has slight variations on our engine configs and programming. I miss the NA. I really do. Car is faster no doubt, in fact, I can tell you it's around 3 seconds a lap faster around Zandvoort.
Power delivery is just no good for me as mine stands. It's flat towards the top. The curves on the graphs are normal for a "stage 2" map and since fitting the actuator it's stronger at the top. But the Megane engine was set how many French turbo cars we're designed from the Peugeot XU10s and maybe earlier..they try to replicate a budget v6. They love their leggy torque type engines to waft around French lanes with a chassis capable of stable cornering so they don't spill their wine in the bends as they drive one-handed (hence the torque, no hands for gear changes and why Clio and meg are auto now)
Clio 3 is about wringing the kneck out of the engine and having a chassis more than capable of dealing with that and the most ham-fisted of pilots. Not coughing and sputtering at 6k onwards.
And this is my next point. To get the 225 engine up to spec is work. Yes cheapest starting point, but avoid it. They are old and slightly off point. If you're going Megane conversion, start with 250 engine. Already Renault addressed the lazy v6 feel and gave you some more revs to play with and it's way more eager to get there.
To get the 225 engine to perform as well you need a 250 turbo, 630 injectors and a remap. Then if you listen to the internet you've got a ticking time bomb as the torques will convert the rods to Scientology and so they shall do their best to leave the block to join the flock. (I hate saying this, famous last words. My 230 lump has had the shit kicked out of it with 330+ torques since conversion...touches all the wood)
Hot. Engine temps are great. Basically, I can drive on track until my fuel level gets to the point where I get fuel surge coming out of the banked corner before the straight at Zandvoort. Around 30 laps. Heat soak is a big problem though. All the cats in the neighbourhood love my car, warm for days. Problem is getting the air out.
Fuel system. It's pants when you combine 225+197/200. Needs changing. I've had fuel surge cuts on track several times on the track. The fuel rail on the 225 is terrible and the weaker Clio pump exacerbates this.
TLDR: 225 engine sounds attractive at face value on cost. In reality, you're better starting with 250 engine.
John Gordon
Paid Member
Honestly, the rational side of my brain says yes.
I liken it to the fact that everyone talks about how the 205 gti has such great handling, but rarely do you hear from those who know the 309 was actually even better.
It's physics. The bigger the footprint, the better the stability. The Clio is narrow, short in length and reasonably tall.
The reality check came when my friends (the blue e46 I'm chasing in the vid above) lapped as quick as me in cars that cost less to build than the base Clio was to buy. (325ci)
As I've stated in the past, I'm 39. I grew up rallying and messing with French hot hatches from the moment I passed my test.
I may sound silly now, but in my head, this spec Clio would be Evo levels of performance. I was wildly off the mark.
I'm not going to stop. I've invested too much into the Clio now and its become my life long project that I'm committed to keeping developing. I love thinking of the next step.
For example, I'm currently working on the engine design that I move to next. I know now from what I've done so far, where I need the power to be. So I'm planning a Franken engine that I hope to see a reliable 350hp revving out to 7-7.5.
I don't think I'm alone in over estimating the Clio at times. And the reality is, do what I've done and sink 30k+ into a Clio, or go faster for a third of that.
John Gordon
Paid Member
John Gordon
Paid Member
J90RDN
Paid Member
Hi John - interesting read. I've had my pure track-only clio for 4 or 5 years now, and it never ceases to amaze me on track. Having not spent any money on it for a year or 2 due to Covid, I'm considering a few changes, namely the Madeno setup, which lead me to your post.
I too have often considered the turbo conversion, having converted my first Mk1 MX5 track car to turbo years ago - 115bhp to 250bhp. I've always been wary of reliability, but one thing I've constantly heard from many people who've done this to the Clio it is that the character and sole of the NA experience is sorely missed. Reading your review has reinforced this.
Going back to the suspension, I currently have a KW V2 setup that I've not been unhappy with, but wondering if the next step would be a customised Madeno setup. The alternative would be AST (5100 or 5200). Do you have any experience of the Madeno setup compared to KW or AST?
The car is pure track only - it will never be driven on the road again.
I too have often considered the turbo conversion, having converted my first Mk1 MX5 track car to turbo years ago - 115bhp to 250bhp. I've always been wary of reliability, but one thing I've constantly heard from many people who've done this to the Clio it is that the character and sole of the NA experience is sorely missed. Reading your review has reinforced this.
Going back to the suspension, I currently have a KW V2 setup that I've not been unhappy with, but wondering if the next step would be a customised Madeno setup. The alternative would be AST (5100 or 5200). Do you have any experience of the Madeno setup compared to KW or AST?
The car is pure track only - it will never be driven on the road again.
Last edited:
John Gordon
Paid Member
Hi, it's each to their own I guess. To be very honest, I leave my car to Madeno as they have been doing a majority of the VLN Clios for year's and have rafts of knowledge.
I love going there and the owner Leo shows me all the different evolutions of damper rates from their damper dyno and I get all geeked out. (I think my current front spec are evo-13 of the bilstein, then you have the ohlins)
On the outside, my front dampers look just like a standard b14 (with an additional air vent) but inside they are completely different with the different valving and bump stops etc.
every decision he advises makes sense, even if sometimes it costs a little more or requires a little extra work. The rear dampers for example. You can get bilstein coil over rears from a few different places. My rear dampers have more capacity than those setups and much bigger damper body and so required the stand off brackets.
KW will see you riding on the bump stop a lot of the time if your running race car low and the AST tend to be a little more fragile. But in the real world, there's not going to be huge lap time differences between any of them.
Leo lives suspension. That's why he builds suspension for LMP, GT3, Belgian rally and a whole raft of other racing series/cars. I buy from Madeno mostly because of him.
As for turbo, it's quick and it will be quicker with work. But for me a rotrex on a forged 197 lump with standalone is the way.
