Cool

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:13 pm

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=4560833597&indexURL=9#ebayphotohosting

Mr Quoter-vator Joined: 16 Feb 2004 Posts: 7405

that is well cool...i really like the look of that....about the only clio i would own.

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 1:20 pm

If I ever get to see Alonso, I will ask for his autograph,

"Oi Alonso, can I have an autograph?"

OK

"No Sorry Alonso I havent got any paper, have you got anything that I could use instead?"

hmmmmmm

Spammer Joined: 27 Jul 2004 Posts: 5717

mals you perv Laughing

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:08 pm

Thats just you and your pervy mide Schaks!

I meant see if he has another V6 hanging around

Spammer Joined: 27 Jul 2004 Posts: 5717

Quote:

"have you got anything that I could use instead?"

right

Posted: Thu Jul 14, 2005 3:16 pm

Oh you got me there good and proper Schaks! my secret is out! Embarassed

Site Subscriber Joined: 13 Oct 2004 Posts: 4722

id own many a clio!

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

shame a 172/182 is a better all round car and faster isn't it!

Site Subscriber Joined: 13 Oct 2004 Posts: 4722

mk1 valver anyday tho!

for me that is.

Site Subscriber Joined: 28 Jan 2005 Posts: 3547

how fastc are the 17/8 2's

Spammer Joined: 27 Jul 2004 Posts: 5717

Chris H wrote:

shame a 172/182 is a better all round car and faster isn't it!

the biggest shame of renault is ending the production of the renault 19 i think ,i would love to own a F7R engined r19

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

really the 2 litres ain't up to much at all!

They should design a decent lump, the 16V lump sare all pretty crap, the cossie YB is a much better lump as is the vauxhall XE lump.

The 17/82's are not that fast, the power output on them varies immensly.

The renault book time is the same as a 19 16V!

Site Subscriber Joined: 07 Oct 2004 Posts: 2281

There's a V6 just like that one cruising about Newark. Seen it a couple of times, stood within touching distance of it as well.

Why I felt the need to state that I have no idea!

Site Subscriber Joined: 05 Jan 2005 Posts: 589

To say the 172/182's are crap is abit harsh i think, they seem to come out tops in a lot of the car mag survey's iv read since they 1st came out, and i knew some guys that have had them and they thought they where spot on, 1 guy had the 172 Ltd Edn and to this day wishes he had never sold it,

and did they not carry on making a 19, except they called it a megane ? iv got the original Top Gear mag test they did on the 2016v megane when it 1st came out and it says it uses the 19 floorpan, except the rear end of the megane was a bit skippy due to having abit of its arse cut off Laughing

Iv give the g/f's 2016v megane cabbie a hard time on the country roads now and again and i think its fookin brilliant Razz

so id imagine the Coupe version (metal roof) is even better.

but they still say the bench mark for everybody else and ultimate hot hatch to beat is the ..............................you guessed it, the Clio Williams Cool

Forum Moderator Joined: 02 Mar 2004 Posts: 19978

I never said they were crap, the engines crap, that no one can argue with.

The clio williams liek the pug 205 is so over rated its not funny.

People who have driven both these cars (like I have in varying states) know better.

I think the megane cabrio is rather poor tbh, handling is shockingly under steery, engine isn't a willing revver and so on.

Site Subscriber Joined: 05 Jan 2005 Posts: 589