The Clio Future

[Robo_#1]

Lucky for you it just so happens I have a torque bean harvest just about to ripen. Work you out a deal? :tongue_smilie:

£2.50/kilo.. have van will travel

 

[Paul]

If the Clio ends up going turbo, I won't be getting one. It will be too similar to the Megane for me not to just get the 'daddy'.

TBH Renault need to be careful not to end up in the same boat as Porsche and restricting performance so that lower models aren't jumping all over the bigger ones. 215+/- 5bhp in a lighter package is going to get very close to a Meg 250.

 

[clio200cup]

If the Clio ends up going turbo, I won't be getting one. It will be too similar to the Megane for me not to just get the 'daddy'.

TBH Renault need to be careful not to end up in the same boat as Porsche and restricting performance so that lower models aren't jumping all over the bigger ones. 215+/- 5bhp in a lighter package is going to get very close to a Meg 250.

by the time a circa 220 brake clio is out, the megane will be facelifted and, potentially, up to circa 270 brake...

 

[skny]

true, stll all depends on the price difference, just hope they will keep the independent axis suspension and some decent brembos, tbh a turboed clio must have the lsd, and that will be a selling point for me, if it goes on sale without one I'll just get a facelifted megane 275 cupped

 

[Roger200]

The Meg '250' has been dyno'd at near on 270bhp by quite a few mags....i'm pretty sure.

 

[Foxspeed]

just enjoy your non-turbo clio engine while you can

 

[Robo_#1]

Its a good point Paul, but all manufactures hold back the lower models in their range otherwise every model would have the biggest engine.

There'll always be a good reason to buy the smaller nimbler and cheaper clio over the bigger more luxurious and more expensive Megane. When I bought my Clio I bought it over the R26 megane I was looking at because it was the right size, and fitted what I needed it for. Not because it didn't have a turbo.

 

[Liambo-201]

To be honest i love the NA engine but if i got a turbo engined Clio i wouldn't mind. Perhaps it would give us less money to spend on more power instead of more money and not much power lol.

 

[kinetic]

turbo all the way for me!! I have owned a clio 200 since september and i really still cant get used to the n/a engine. I owned a 1.4 t jet turbo punto before the clio just dosent exite me at all with the na engine. there is no boost and whacked back to your seat feeling and I really miss the torque of a turbo. also the steering feels too light, maby because it is a 200 with cup chassis. I cant wait for the new turbo clio so i can trade in this n/a. i also feel sorry honda type r owners. 147 lbs torque and n/a. must feel like a 1.2 unless it is thrashed lol.

 

[wingman]

Hi guys - haven't been on here for awhile (ordered a Clio 200 in December 2010, changed my mind and got a Nissan Juke Dig-T instead), so this is a really ironic post for me.

I'm also part of the Juke Owners Forum (posting under the same name) but still regularly check the Clio 197.net forum for the interesting posts and great forum goers.

First off, I'll explain the reason why I chose the Juke over the Clio 200, it was mostly due to the pricing structure. Exactly the same monthly cost, cheaper deposit although a slightly more expensive guaranteed value fee. However, to counteract the GVF the insurance was less than half the price (Clio £1200 p/annum, Juke £550 p/annum), and the mpg was rated at 46 combined although realistically I'm getting around the 40mpg mark as opposed to the Clio 200's 36mpg mark (can this be confirmed)?

I've heard rumours of the 1.6 DIG-T engine going in the next RS Clio, and all I can say is that the engine is a BLAST! I test drove the Clio 200, and got her up to 80mph and had around 10 minutes of fun, so I'm not a virgin to it's offerings, but I'm so much more in love with a turbo'd engine.

The Jukes 0-62 isn't too shabby either, not as quick as the Clio 200's estimated 6.9 (Juke's is 8.0's), but when considering the weight and extensive luxuries the Juke offers, I reckon they could tune the same engine, slap it in the Clio 2** and shave some time off that 6.9.

Don't get me wrong, it handles nothing like a Clio 200, I've tried to do a few corners in this baby and felt like I was going to roll, corners that the 200 would've laughed over. I'm literally just discussing my thoughts on the potential engine of the next RS Clio, which I'm "possibly" the first to own on the forum.

Still love the Clio 200 (and the whole RS range), but it came to a head over heart decision with me, and as fuel prices are going up (136.9 in my area), a turbo is something you're going to have to deal with, if you want money in your pocket & a performance vehicle, turbo is certainly a step in the right direction, and a big step at that.
.
.
.
.
Seriously, please don't ban me for this treachery.

 

[Foxspeed]

Hi guys - haven't been on here for awhile (ordered a Clio 200 in December 2010, changed my mind and got a Nissan Juke Dig-T instead), so this is a really ironic post for me.

I'm also part of the Juke Owners Forum (posting under the same name) but still regularly check the Clio 197.net forum for the interesting posts and great forum goers.

First off, I'll explain the reason why I chose the Juke over the Clio 200, it was mostly due to the pricing structure. Exactly the same monthly cost, cheaper deposit although a slightly more expensive guaranteed value fee. However, to counteract the GVF the insurance was less than half the price (Clio £1200 p/annum, Juke £550 p/annum), and the mpg was rated at 46 combined although realistically I'm getting around the 40mpg mark as opposed to the Clio 200's 36mpg mark (can this be confirmed)?

I've heard rumours of the 1.6 DIG-T engine going in the next RS Clio, and all I can say is that the engine is a BLAST! I test drove the Clio 200, and got her up to 80mph and had around 10 minutes of fun, so I'm not a virgin to it's offerings, but I'm so much more in love with a turbo'd engine.

The Jukes 0-62 isn't too shabby either, not as quick as the Clio 200's estimated 6.9 (Juke's is 8.0's), but when considering the weight and extensive luxuries the Juke offers, I reckon they could tune the same engine, slap it in the Clio 2** and shave some time off that 6.9.

Don't get me wrong, it handles nothing like a Clio 200, I've tried to do a few corners in this baby and felt like I was going to roll, corners that the 200 would've laughed over. I'm literally just discussing my thoughts on the potential engine of the next RS Clio, which I'm "possibly" the first to own on the forum.

Still love the Clio 200 (and the whole RS range), but it came to a head over heart decision with me, and as fuel prices are going up (136.9 in my area), a turbo is something you're going to have to deal with, if you want money in your pocket & a performance vehicle, turbo is certainly a step in the right direction, and a big step at that.
.
.
.
.
Seriously, please don't ban me for this treachery.

whats it like on fuel ? before i ban ya :thumbsup:

 

[Arran]

40 MPG is good. In my Clio I struggle to get 34 on the motorway, with everyday drving in towns and slow start stop roads I get 23-24 MPG.

 

[luke3]

Drop down to 65 Arran on motorway, I get 38mpg with ease!

 

[wingman]

whats it like on fuel ? before i ban ya :thumbsup:

If I concentrate and drive extremely carefully I can manage 49mpg, but driving like I stole it I'm averaging 25-35mpg.

Being a turbo, you never really feel like you're pushing it though. Depending on your driving nature, this can be seen as a positive or a negative.

Be warned, she's a quiet engine. I'm fitting a Stillen exhaust soon to waken her up a bit.

 

[Webby]

There's an interesting piece about future Renault engines in Andrew Benson latest blog on the BBC F1 site.

...Renault's backing is rooted in marketing - it does not, unlike Mercedes and Ferrari, run its own F1 team and, unlike Cosworth, racing engines are not its core business.

Renault's F1 managing director Jean-Francois Caubet says the fact the sport is changing to a new more sustainable engine formula is one of three reasons for staying involved.

"The proposed rules are road-relevant and completely in line with Renault's road car strategy," he says. "We have already started design concepts on the 2013 engine, as this dovetails with our plans in road cars."

The French company plans for such engines - let's call them small capacity turbo-hybrid - to make up at least 70% of its road-car portfolio by 2015. It accepts the new F1 rules will cost money, but believes that is a price worth paying.

Caubet says Renault's presence in F1 is not "dependent on any future engine regulations", but does add the company is "very supportive of any regulations that make F1 more relevant to the overall aims of the Renault group".

Equally, proponents of the new engines point out that it is unfair to say no new manufacturers or sponsors have come in as a result of the new rules...

Full article here:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2011/04/power_play_over_new_f1_rules.html

 

[Foxspeed]

theres a new dci engine due out - the 1.9 is gone and in its place.......a 1.6dci

also theres plans for a range of "next generation 3cylinder engines" due out soon :thumbsup:

 

[MikeLYR27]

I dont see the clio being a turbo a bad idea. I LOVE the revviness of the F4R but, after having a go in a stage 1 meg it was immense. Was still great fun. A small clio with bigger boost will still be fun.