Good, upgrading from the WRX then!

Funnily enough there are Clio's in the Nurburgring 24hour....no Impreza's though?

Should have gone to JAE last weekend for a driver

 

It's a vast difference.

In gear times from 4000-7000 rpm the impreza will also be quicker due to the turbo.

Only point the clio cup will be even remotely as quick is from 30-80 and it should still get thumped.

Any one got any figures for that time?

By way of comparison a classic sti will do it in 12.5 easily- some old reviews around on the net got them to 100 in 11.5...

 

I used to own a Mk1 Clio 172 (much lighter than the Mk2) - which my mother now tears up Buckinghamshire in (!!) and the wife has a Mk2 172.
- In the last 2 years I have also had a Honda CTR, BMW M3 Evo, the Clio and the Scoob - so I am not yet a hardened Scoob nut - but I maintain the Scoob is the best all rounder .....

 

I wouldn't disagree with that.

 

It doesnt however take into effect the actual power curve for the engine ie which has the greater area enclosed under the graph.

Peak power is far less important than power produced at any given rpm- that deteremines the accelerational level at that point in the rev range.

Having the same engine size, but a turbo is what makes the real difference to the impreza acceleration, it gives it far more force through its rev range, which equates to greater accelerational ability.

 

They are already doing that. The new DCCD-A has significantly less loss through the system than the current UK spec STi

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/space/s...s/patrick1.jpg

 

lol.

 

really WOW!! didn't realise. Makes me even more chuffed my humble (old) bugeye'd sti wr1 wannabe can still cut the mustard

 

Not having a go, just having a laugh with ya mate.

 

figured

Returing on topic, the Clio 182's a damm good car (though I still wouldnt take it over an old Williams for driver imvolvement) but for overall acceleration and ability the imprezas a safer bet, unless your too young to insurance one, or need something with lower running costs (though french reliability and build quality compared to jap levels is another issue...) and better mpg.

If you thrash it totally, as they've now shown a modded 182 will keep up with a poorly driven lower power impreza. If however the same imprezas thrashed to the same level it'll thump it everytime.

 

Depends what Impreza you're referring to. MY01 was slower than my Mk1 172.

 

thought you said you haven’t got a Clio?

 

Nuff said really no contest.

 

I haven't......

....I did, but I haven't now. My Mk1 172 was crap.

 

Nuff said then. Given the mk1 172 was quicker than the mk2 172.

 

....the cup is quicker than both of them!

 

Nice to see there are still members of the "faster means better" club.

The 172 Cup is miles better than my Mk1, and just as quick.

All I'm saying is that the Bug-eye WRX scoobs are slower than a Clio Cup.....purely cos they are.

Scoob is a better car, just slower.

 

Just Not as fast as the BLOB eyed WRX scoobs.... nevermind!

 

That I could believe! Having driven a 6month old Bug Eye before I bought my brand new 03 - the extra cash was money well spent in my book ..... the 01's are nice and prgressive - but there is no turbo russssssssssssssssssssssh

 

Nevermind?? Err, I'm not bothered as my 944 is quicker than all of them.

I'm playing devils advocate and just calling it as it is. I have no allegiance to either. My 172 was ****e, and I don't like modern scoobs unless they're STi or such like.

I do however like the Cup, it is a wicked motor.

 

Exactly what I thought. It wasn't an "IMPREZA" was it. Just a moderately powerful saloon with a bodykit.

Looked fast - wasn't fast.

I still love the later classic shape. P1, STI 6 etc. Can't beat them!!!

 

Snr AP - What I should have bought when I got mine was a P1 - same price and sat next to each other at the dealership ..... but all I could think was *brand new car*

 

Oh well. Next time eh!! I'll never buy brand new - waste of money imo.

Still love the P1.

 

Jamelia is quite fit aint she.

 

Good videos, just one comment to make though, why is it that when I come across Clio 172/Cups and even the odd 182 that they seem to be slower than my de-catted, remapped UK classic Wagon?
Jujdging from the wheelspin they get and the p1ssed off looks I presume they are trying. Even did one from a rolling start onto motorway sliproad. Surely if we believe the video evidence they should hand me my *** on a plate rather than the opposite being the case.
In this case we had some bad technique from the Impreza drivers and some great driving from the Clio owner. Respect is due but it proves nothing about what happens in 99% of cases in the real world.

Imprezas rule (sometimes)

 

Exactly.

 

Mad Mark ....... only just caught up with this thread ....... My 140 bhp 205 did not kick Davey boys axrse round the Nurburgring. I was out trying to break the 9 minute lap (something dave does with virtually every lap) with Dave in front guiding the way. He braked and let me passed in one of the only sections where the pug is quicker than his Porsche.

Lets remember that the performance figures for these cars are created by someone sat at 6000 rpm in the scoob and dropping the clutch and the same in the Cup but at around 4000 RPM........I seriously doubt this sort of thing is something we would do very often if at all.
It didn't matter what I did to my old 183BHP clio and for how long it would not deliver less than 28-30 MPG. I then test drove a 03 WRX with the thought of changing. For what was an extra £8,000 (new price against new price) it really didnt feel much different performance wise, and certainly would have cost alot more to run. The STi is a different animal it must be said, but even so I wouldn't bet against a Cup driver when faced with an STi around a medium speed circuit.

Underestimate one of these little pocket rockets at your peril I say.......remember it takes a seriously more powerful car to overtake and pull away from any hot hatch.........I destroyed a 172 clio / Astra / type R usually translates to i pulled away from it a car length in 1/2 mile.

 

Funny the chaver last night who decided to sit on the bumper of my WR1 in his 182 lasted about half of fourth gear before he was a spec in my rear view mirror. Then after 10 minutes he caught up and witnessed a nice blue flame when I dumped it in fifth and done exactly the same.

Same thing done to chavers in the following cars who have wanted some of my @ss

Cupra R
CLK 320
172
Renault 5 GT Turbo
Nova 1.3i
Focus RS
Focus 170
Fiesta Turbo
BMW Z3
BMW Z4
BMW 330ci

lol I never get tired of it either!

I know this bears no relevance to the subject of the topic being a standard uk apparently getting beaten by a ClioSport but in a dog eat dog world there is always a big daddy ready to come and beat the **** out of the punks who get on the case of his younger brothers

 

Couldn't agree more.....

....I cannot think of a more irrelevant measure of performance than a standing 1/4 for driving the roads around my area (Argyll & Lochaber). They are just simply too nuts..... variable surfaces, adverse camber, sheep.... .....

And let's be honest..... we all have our own personal "special little roads" that we know every inch of, exactly what RPM for each corner, exactly what line to take etc. etc. I can think of a couple of roads like that where I would be quite confident that I could cover the ground more quickly in the other half's BMW 330D than a Scooby/Clio/Cupra driver with little experience of the route..... let alone my 04 STI.

So get out there, on to your "special little road(s)", and pleasure yourselves, no matter what your chariot!!!! I do!!!!


Me 2p.