LG John

Agree, I'd maintain that a standard VTS would beat a standard classic shape scooby round knockhill.

Rabid

I'm not 'harping on about the faults' as the good lord puts it, it's just from my point of view a car which comes 'as new' with basic wiring faults, seats not attached and a host of other problems freely viewable on the Trophy owners site is a non starter.
What I drive is not in question, but as it seems to interest davy I'm in a 3 series hire car at the moment. Might be a Vectra next week for all I know, lucky me.
More to the point is that my girlfriend and I were looking for a fun second car and if it worked reliably out of the box the Trophy would be right up there in the list.
If I was looking for a track car I'd buy something a bit more serious than a Clio.

TheJesus

okay, maybe harping on is the wrong choice of words, just as the phrases you use to describe the cars reliability may the wrong choice, as they give the impression you feel strongly about these matters. my point is that you dont own one and going on a sight where people discuss problems with their cars can never really give a true reflection as it's biased. yes they will have problems on some of the models, but this is real life and no car is perfect, new or otherwise and people are obviously going to discuss this. you seem to be just slagging the car of for the sake of it imo without actually having any knowledge on it whatsoever, bar what you have read in a technical discussion forum and the typical perception of reliability on French cars.

Rabid

I can see what you're getting at. What actually happened isn't actually quite as you describe though. Obviously faults are going to happen with any car and they are going to be emphasised on an owners website. When I used to post on here in the past it was always talk about MAF's and piston slap.
What shocked me when I was doing my research into getting a Trophy (even talked a deal with a broker) were the kind of faults with the trophy and the high proportion of owners reporting faults (bearing in mine they only made 500 of them). Just go and take a look on the owners website and you'll see a high percentage are reporting what I would regard as avoidable faults ie something not actually screwed to the car, or wires incorrectly connected etc. These aren't failures of design which you might reasonably expect but the type of basic errors in construction I thought had died long ago.

should add I wish they were perfect as we'd have something fun to punt around this weekend instead of trawling round yet more dealers.

Mog

Why has no one except Steve mentioned the Forester STi which came 6th and has 330/330....Perhaps John should have a drive of that !!!!

Mog

davyboy

......yep, me too.

john banks

I tried a UK Forester and enjoyed the comedy handling for a short while, but STIs are not easy to find to test - I would expect it to be lower, firmer with bigger brakes and faster by 100 BHP - about right? Apart from image or practicality I cannot understand choosing one solely for performance reasons or a fun drive over an STI Impreza unless you've jumped on an anti-Impreza bandwagon and automatically excluded the decent ones from your test. How does reducing all the wonderful grip and body control that an Impreza has make a better performance car? On the road it is safe, on the track the handling is exploitable. Less is more is taking it a bit far when we deliberately reduce the grip and body control in the name of fun for a performance road car? Otherwise we'd all want RWD in the ice and ridiculous power and comparing our Bridgestone Hedgefinders with out Toyo Kerbcrunchers.

SiPie

John

IIRC it was the Megane Trophy that EVO were involved in tweaking as it neared production.

Cheers (and good luck with the new motor !!)

7 Foot

Yep, you're right SiPie.

john banks

I'm bored of it SiPie. Should've bought another Subaru

It rattles, has no torque, no traction and the dealer is rubbish.

LG John

Is this the M3 we are talking about? John you really have set the bar very high in your driving life Tell me, do you sent people home with a pankiller unless they bleed profusely over your practise or have something hanging off because it seems to me unless it has 450bhp, 450lbft, is well built, corners like its on rails, looks great, has a great image and 'isn't too flashy' then no car will do

john banks

I don't think I set the bar too high when you consider the costs involved. I could delete the looks great and has a great image quite happily from that spec, what car is it please?

Robertio

iTrader: (1)

John, unless you are willing to spend a lot of money on a genuine super car I think you are stuffed I've finally realised that I will never own a car I find quick enough - last time I got the RX back it was making 360@wheels and I was disappointed at how slow it felt, it now has 400@wheels and no doubt the only time it will be enough is when it is wet. I fear that you may be suffering from the same problem.

My next car is going to stay standard (which means it will have to be NA) and be relatively slow - what's the point in trying quicker and quicker cars when ultimately they will never be quick enough? better to get something relatively sedate and not waste the money.

FWIW shortly after making 180@wheels at Star (a few years back) we were over in Europe and the RX stayed with an E46 M3 all the way up to an indicated 160 (at which point there was traffic) so I'm not surprised you are finding it a little sedate.

john banks

I know what you mean Robertio, and we've both had silly power with dubious reliability. I think 400 BHP with a very wide power band in a Scooby or Evo is enough for a road car.

LG John

You drove one yesterday. As you say an FQ340 modded to 400bhp really does fit the bill in so many ways. The only problem is that its just not 'special' I can't stress this enough and maybe others are different but the biggest difference between my S2000 and my scooby and other cars is that feeling you get when you climb in. This isn't a car that started life as a humble saloon and got ramped up, nor as a shopping hatchback and had a 1.6 16v and fancy alloys added. It was designed from day 1 to look, drive and do what it does. It therefore feels special in a way that I don't believe an Evo, M3, scooby, hot-hatch, etc ever can. A prime example of this 'feeling' is when you get into an elise. Sure the boggo versions are underpowered, unreliable, badly built, etc but when you climb in you climb into an experience and not a gigillion lbft family saloon with stick on spoilers, etc.

For me I think I'll always crave that now. I also wonder if this is what you craved when you set about getting the M3 - at the end of the day its slower in nearly every regard than your Impreza and no more practical or cheaper to run but everyone kept saying 'how good they are'. I wonder if you've found that for all its good point an M3 is basically a faster, better looking and better handling 330i which is itself a faster, better handling and better looking 320d. Maybe you need something that when you climb aboard gives you something more than bhp/lbft, etc. I've had countless argument with people that say the S2000 is slow - even if it is slow by modern standards it feels so different. Perhaps its time to attack your 'car problem' not with cc's, 60-120mph times or cornering g-force but with how driving the vehicle makes you feel My car makes me laugh sometime - not because of anything it can do (my scooby could match it afterall) but the way it does it, its character. Food for thought perhaps

john banks

Interesting thoughts.

I'm more worried about decimating my favourite road in a turbo nutter saloon that looks crap I think. Floats my boat still.

T-uk

dont see that myself having started doing knockhill in a mk2 golf gti with modded 2litre mk3 engine with 130 @ the wheels on same dyno day vr6's did 140 , uprated brakes and koni suspension. they would have to "work" to pass but then I could not keep up. actually at my very first trackday I also drove a standard MY98 scoob , dave brown of AWD was there in his gti-r and we had a cracking battle , leaving a e36 in the process. funniest thing was the beamer owner had come up to me in the pit lane ,waiting for the session to start and asked me to let him and dave past so they could have a bit of sport. the owner of MY98 said I would never drive the car again if I did but if he got level I was to lift. 4 laps later dave and I are at the top of duffus and the m3 is at hair-pin

next time k/hills on , time a few laps for different cars. standard scoobs , especially P1's and wr1's do surprisingly well at k/hill as the straights are not too long.

the same owner of the MY98 scoob has also had a s2000. on roads the scoob or his evo6 loved the s2000 was scary for on the limit driving , faster than his standard MY99 on the straights , which we both put down to the revs and gearing rather than grunt but it just did not like bumps, jumps and road changes.this was a few years ago so the later might be better? iirc his s2000's rear tyres lasted <4k

I do not think either need that much.

kenny, go and try a fq340. it feels more like a hot hatch than a 4door saloon. I do not think it is the car for JB , it is more a skin heed with a base ball-bat and for JB's miles the scoob gets my vote.

LG John

I base my opinion of the standard classic vs vts primarily on handling and grip. Frankly on smooth sweeping bends the VTS embarrassed the scooby on standard 16s - scoobys I've driven on 17s seem better. What the VTS would lose in the straights I'm confident it would make back in corners on a track like surface.

The S2000 is improved in later versions but still skips a little like you describe. No doubt the impreza is a quicker vehicle over your broken scottish c-road. However, that said whilst my initial reaction to the s2000s ability to take on the truely twisty scottish roads was one of dissapointment it improved markedly when I my confidence with the car grew. Where I'd previously back off a little for fear of the 'skipping' knocking the back end off line I'd now be more prone to power through it and if need be adjust to a few degrees of tail out. On smoother roads the S2000 handles and grips better than my scooby but you have to push it pretty hard and to the point where a little driver error will land you in a lot of trouble really quick. At least with the scooby you had to go really quite crazy to get into trouble and even then your best guess panic reaction could often get you out of trouble.

On this issue I again come back to my point that we so easily become obsessed with what can hold a few 0.1gs more cornering force than the next car. Frankly which of my three cars I'd be faster in the twisties in (vts, my99, s2000) comes down to how brave I'm feeling that day and in each instance has as much to do with the quality/wear level of the tyres I have at the time more than anything else. The S2000 for example currently has about 2-3mm up front but with fairly worn shoulders. To look at you'd say the tyres will need doing soon but they are nowhere near illegal. Despite this the turn in is frankly shocking and the understeer upsets the whole balance of the car. With new tyres fitted up front it is almost impossible to get it to understeer and it would be very noticeably quicker in the twisties so each time we talk of one car beating another we have to give due regard to conditions, tyres, drivers, etc.

A better assessment I feel is which car handles in a way that makes you smile the most? For me the FR layout of the S2000 is a clear winner and I love that there is no power corruption through the front wheels and the way you can adjust the vehicle so much more than the other two.

As the saying goes, 'you pays your money and makes yer choices' - problem is you probably can't have it all even if you had an unlimited budget.

darryl90

in your dreams!

leonpoole

Plus is there such a thing as a standard classic impreza

LG John

Granted a standard classic is rare these days

Darryl90 you keyboard warrior you - I'm not dreaming at all. I've owned both vehicles and covered over 30,000 miles in each of them so I'm relatively qualified to voice my opinion on the matter.

Remember a vts is a truely awful car in terms of build quality, etc. It weighs 930kg (over 200kg lighter) has relatively wide and low profile tyres and very capable suspension.

T-uk

but how many times did you have the saxo and scoob round k/hill?

LG John

Lol, neither but I've been round KN and been on plenty of similar roads. JB took me for a pax lap once with the classical music at full blast all the while being careful not to go above 3500rpm

john banks

LOL. Don't judge Knockhill by my very limited abilities.

LG John

He, He, I'm not I clocked it as a sax happy course though with only that 'dip' just after the straight posing a potential rear out problem.

T-uk

not really as the rear coming out at the top lets you flick it the other way for the lower part. your not trying hard enough if the rear only comes out once a lap in a fwd

LG John

VTS's are so dirt cheap I might consider one for track fun one day if I've got spare money around

T-uk

I like knockhill because it feels like a legal road thrash if that makes sense. the hills , lack of banked bends and feel of the place is more like a back road blast . I think it is great regardless of what is under the bonnet.

leonpoole

lol @ Clio. Its just an opinion of some random people. There is no way on earth a clio is better then an evo 9 for example. All you clio boys keep dreaming, just because some magazine says your the car of the year really means nothing

leonpoole

i was going to buy a 911 but the clio was much better so chose not to