A brilliant little dodgem car
Battery cell became faulty, thus resulting in a new battery needing to be purchased. This happened after about nine months (11,000 miles).
The car is excellent value for money.
The car has a personality of its own and is often referred to as a dodgem car as it is so cute.
The car is always reliable if treated well.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 20th July, 2001
A wolf in sheep's clothing
Nothing really. Oh, everyone is afraid to travel with me 'cos it's so fast...
What a stormer. Excellent performer. Faster than hot snot on greased lightning, okay, slight exaggeration there. Slight! Great handling (takes a bit of getting used to) and great feedback through the steering. Beats the VTi I had previously hands down. In short, no problems / complaints to date. And I've clocked up over 3200 miles over the last 5 weeks. Loved every mile of it.
Only bad point - the torque steer is something to watch for - especially in the wet. Fun enough in the dry, but can lead to a skidmark or two in your undies in the wet...
If you're thinking about one, GO ON - TREAT YOURSELF!!! Performance wise this car won't disappoint.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 13th March, 2001
The comment I believe is not a comparison against a 1.6 Honda but rather a comparison against the last car the person owned.
Honda owners should not take this reviewers words as criticism. Mugen who?
I don't know why these people are getting so upset with you comparing the 172 to a VTi - that are direct competitors in the same class, i.e. hot hatches. They were saying that the VTi is a bigger car - it is only slightly bigger and has not got much more room in it than the Clio. The Clio is a cheaper, faster, better handling car with similar running costs. It also looks far better and is without a doubt a far superior car. I am not an anti Honda person - I have owned Honda's CRX Vtecs & Civic VTi's before and am a great fan of their engines et al, but I had a good long test drive in a 172 and immediately I realized it was a far better car to drive.
Haven't driven any Clio but I'm not expecting better handling than Honda with its double wishbones + low gravity center and excellent steering..
Honda should have better cornering and comfort...
I'm going to buy a Renault, after I'm sure about handling issues...
And: Anybody studied the Renault Clio Sport 172 's undercarriage? Is the camber adjustable?
--->>> Basar
Hot Hatch Heaven! - Part II
Steering wheel needed alignment.
Water leak through wheel arch - had to be re-sealed.
A fast, smooth, car that handles very well. Acceleration and overtaking are a treat in this car, as is interior comfort.
All the options are included with this car as standard. A more sporty exhaust would have been nice.
For more info on this top car, visit my website: www.cliosport.net
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 7th March, 2001
Makes you smile and smile
Nothing so far.
This car is fantastic. It is barking mad when you get above 4000+ revs, a bit like a baby Impreza Turbo.
The styling is great, it looks good inside, but that engine... Everyone should have one.
Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes
Review Date: 20th December, 2000
I completely agree with this guy, I have had mine for 7 weeks and I love it to bits...
Best thing that I've done in it so far, had a 3 way race with an M3 and an Evo Merc, kicked both their asses!!!
Quality car!!
Yeah I have to admit a 172 is faster than an M3 (Not!!!)
Did your 172 accidently come with an extra 200bhp and you have clearly managed to shave 2 seconds off your 0-60 time, not to mention add about 40mph to your top end.
14th Mar 2001, 10:07
You compare the Renault to a Honda VTI? - which is a 1.6 compared to the Renaults 2.0 litre and is also a larger car... no wonder the Renault is quicker, but wait for the new Civic Type-R to come out (2 litre also) and perhaps it will be a level playing field?