[All] [Generic] MR2 Turbo vs Clio 172

Discussion and technical advice the SW20 MR2. 3S-GTE, 3S-GE, 3S-FE etc
Anything and everything to do with maintenance, modifications and electrical is in here for the Mk2.

Moderators: IMOC Moderators, IMOC Committee Members

shibby!
Posts: 2747
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:48 pm
Location: Kirkcaldy, Fife

Re: [All] [Generic] MR2 Turbo vs Clio 172

Post by shibby! »

zebidi wrote:
nakamura wrote:EK9 is the best hot hatch made. 185bhp from a 1.6. Rev1+2 tubby matching 0-60. Great handling.

Awesome.


*Chants* EK9 EK9 EK9 EK9 EK9 EK9!!!!!!!!! *Chants*

\:D/ :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: \:D/


BOOOO!!!!!

What about Lancia Delta

Pulsar Gtir

Clio Williams.

Nick
refo

Re: [All] [Generic] MR2 Turbo vs Clio 172

Post by refo »

yeh the gtir is the daddy of hot hatches. 5.2 to 60 as standard 140+
standard engine can take 400bhp with only fueling mods and a new turbo. gearbox is pants though.

shame the metro 6r4 doesnt really count as a hatch back.
nakamura
Posts: 2512
Joined: Wed Mar 29, 2006 2:40 pm
Location: bournemouth

Re: [All] [Generic] MR2 Turbo vs Clio 172

Post by nakamura »

GtI-R-
0-60 5.6ish
227bhp 200ft/lbs
Turbo engine
Cheese filled gearbox

EK9
0-60 5.7
185bph
All naturally powered engine.............
Sounds amazing, great handling
V-tec
Honda
Awesome




:mrgreen:
shibby!
Posts: 2747
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:48 pm
Location: Kirkcaldy, Fife

Re: [All] [Generic] MR2 Turbo vs Clio 172

Post by shibby! »

Best hot hatch or the definative hot hatch.


Best, well that will be the one that is the fastest and handles the best. So probable the Lancia Integralle Evo

Definative, 205 Gti :)


Dont like the Ek9 at all, no idea why. Probably because i am not a Honda fan, think they can do better than "The tek"

Nick
splashnatz
Posts: 2068
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2005 12:23 pm
Location: LEEDS

Re: [All] [Generic] MR2 Turbo vs Clio 172

Post by splashnatz »

shibby! wrote:

Definative, 205 Gti :)


Nick


disagree, the definative hot hatch is the Golf mk1 1.6 GTI. Revvier than the 1.8. To my mind the Mk1 Golf puts the little Pug into "also ran" status.

Think you're right about the integrale though.
mrfil13
Posts: 1102
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 7:18 pm
Location: Cambridge (ish)

Re: [All] [Generic] MR2 Turbo vs Clio 172

Post by mrfil13 »

I would say the original R5 turbos, the first people mad enough to put a turbo in a small hot hatch.
shibby!
Posts: 2747
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 8:48 pm
Location: Kirkcaldy, Fife

Re: [All] [Generic] MR2 Turbo vs Clio 172

Post by shibby! »

splashnatz wrote:
shibby! wrote:

Definative, 205 Gti :)


Nick


disagree, the definative hot hatch is the Golf mk1 1.6 GTI. Revvier than the 1.8. To my mind the Mk1 Golf puts the little Pug into "also ran" status.

Think you're right about the integrale though.


That was the 1st recognised hot hatch (few before it were not really recognised)

But as Clarkson said. VW invented, Peugeot perfected it :)

I was always a 205 fan, i would have another in heart beat, would have to be Mi16 though :)

As i remmeber there was always the competition between the Pug and VW camps. :) 1.6 vs 8v and the 1.9 vs 16v



R5 turbo, no doubt a good wee car, as Splashnatz said, for me thats just an also ran car.


nick
Post Reply

Return to “MR2 MK2 1990 - 1999 NA & Turbo”