30th Nov 2006, 03:57
You can still talk about a car's performance without childish my cars better than yours boasting, especially in any of the hot hatchback reviews: VTR, VTS, GTI etc and so on.
16th Aug 2008, 07:18
My vtr is fun :). can can beat about 7 outa 10 cars I race I lost to a rover 600 the other day ha.
30th Dec 2008, 18:51
I've never drove a VTS so I cannot comment. I currently own a 51 plate VTR, and since having it I haven't seen a car in its league (apart from the VTS) that gives you a all round car.
Nippy, cheap on fuel, good insurance, nice looking etc.
I'm currently looking at a Type R and Fiesta ST, but I just don't think the cars live upto the standards of the Saxo.
The Type R will eat juice, a lot to insure, not that thrilling (only in vtec) and cost more for parts as the Fiesta would. Now compare that to a small 1.6 8v Saxo.
1st Jan 2009, 06:52
Are you crazy? A type R or Fiesta ST don't match the standards of a Saxo VTR...
Not only are both cars a fair bit faster, 6.5 seconds and 7.9 0-60 respectively, compared to about 10, but both are far more reliable, and both return mid 30's mpg on mixed driving (dipping to high 20's going short fast journeys, and high 30's on a long run).
The only possible argument for owning the Saxo is its cheap insurance and it costs peanuts to buy in the first place... but there is a reason for both.
1st Jan 2009, 15:50
30th Dec 2008, 18:51.
I think he didn't word it properly.
What he should have said is the saxo is a fun and decent car for the money.
2nd Apr 2009, 08:00
Just thought I'd throw my 2 cents in.
I had a VTR (98bhp) for a year or two before my mate wrote it off.
Lovely little car, very quick, I did a 0-60 once using my phone stopwatch. The result was about 9 seconds.
Compared to the other cars in the household, a Merc CLK 3.2 ltr Automatic and a Toyota Celica VVti 2.0 litre, the Saxo felt quicker 0-60.
The car was bog standard and had 33,000 on the clock.
The funny thing I found was it could do a top speed of 127mph. Which compared to the book speed of about 112mph is pretty good.
However now I'm older and wiser, I realise doing that speed in a car as small as that was stupid. However unlike some small cars, those speeds never felt dangerous in the Saxo.
I now own a BMW 318ci (2 litre) and it feels a lot slower 0-60 than my VTR. The BMW's book time is 9.2 seconds 0-60.
Problems I had with the car are water dripped into the interior light via the ariel on the roof. Easy job to fix did it myself with some silicon.
One of the electric windows stopped working. It turned out to be the switch had got some dirt on it, one wipe and it was fine again.
There was quite a bit of road noise in the car, solution to this is obviously turn the radio up.
I do miss the car and would recommend it to any young drivers.
17th Jun 2009, 10:45
I have a late Y reg (01) saxo VTR, Blue (looks nice) pretty economical providing you don't drive like a clown.
I paid 1800 only had 45k on clock, perfect condition everywhere, no teen mods. (standard 1.6 VTR)
Very happy with my purchase.
0-60 looking around 7 - 8 seconds.. my point being, if you have a clean one - well maintained it will show.
Remap might be on the cards... see how it performs.
I don't race the streets or anything, but to have that extra poke is nice.. Love the little hatch.
17th Jun 2009, 15:56
You should be careful making 0-60 claims on this site. There is another VTR thread with someone else who thought their VTR did a couple of seconds better than manufacturer figures... generally people just don't believe it, but I agree they are a lot of car for the money :)
18th Jun 2009, 02:32
The Saxo VTR can do 0-60 in 7 - 8 seconds? The VTS with about 25bhp more achieves those times, not a VTR.
6th Jul 2009, 11:48
I have a VTR 52 plate and my mate has a VTS. I've raced him many times and I kept up with him to almost 80. 0-60 I did in about 8 seconds, there is not a lot between them. I've also had 133 out of mine. It was downhill on the motorway and wouldn't push no more.
6th Jul 2009, 17:36
Don't ruin more than one thread...
Can we just stick to book figures as a guideline and all move on with our lives? I for one am fed up with reviews getting this kind of spam from every young lad who thinks his car is running on rocket fuel and pulls 0-60 times out of the air.
25th Jun 2011, 19:07
Haha.. Have you ever owned a Saxo VTR? I doubt it, and if you had you would know you can do 108 mph in 4th.. I hate it when people comment on these review sites saying what they read on Parkers or stats off Autotrader, and have no actually idea what cars are capable of; they just like to think they do.. Don't comment on a car you have never owned, let alone sat in.
26th Jun 2011, 06:43
My list of cars so far include a Mini with a 1300GT engine, Nova 1.4, Fiesta 1.6S with uprated cams 110bhp, mk1 Saxo VTR, Civic 1.8 VTi x2, Honda Integra Type R dc2 x3, and a turbo dc2 320bhp, Audi S3 remapped to 260bhp, BMW 323i, Honda Integra Type R dc5 x2.
So as you can see, I have owned a few fast cars in my time, and the fastest was easily the turbo Teg; 0-60 less than 6 seconds if it was dry. Don't know exact time because I never timed it. Just wanted to show I'm not a youngster with stupid claims about the Saxo.
In my honest opinion, I had a very good condition Saxo with around 50,000 miles, well serviced with a good strong engine.
Now as for acceleration, I owned this car after my Fiesta, and I can honestly say it was much slower than the Fiesta, and handled about the same (the Fiesta was lowered and had a strut bar) but the handling was different on both cars in how they felt. The Saxo felt more planted, but understeered more on the limit. The Fiesta felt better on fast sweeping bends, but lost out on low speed corners (more to do with the crap tyres on the Fiesta I think).
As for top speed, I once raced my friend in his Seat Leon 1.6S, and we were going slightly downhill, and both our speedos were reading 117mph, and neither one of us could go faster. I think that is pretty close to what manufacturer has stated, and with a slight downhill, I believe that figure to be fairly accurate.
28th Nov 2006, 11:34
To the guy that's moaning about comments, whether you like it or not this site caters for the nonsense figure talk as you like to call it. This is not childish banter, just part of the fun of being into cars, if you want to talk about MPG, how big the boot is, or if the seats cradle your bottom nicely, then go ahead. But personaly I like to talk more about how good the car feels when you floor it, how it handles, and every now and again, good old 0-60 comparisons.