Reply With Quote*BINGO*Originally Posted by jimma
Not when it's running three pistons in four cylinders
I was waiting for this.
tart
LOL
/y0z
Hi Paul - how you doing mate?
Well I hope.
y0z is Me, and Yes, from ClioSport.netwhats y0z? clio forum i guess?
Punto's I have gone against - maybe 7/8 have all been obliterated.
They come racing up behind me, I put my foot down, they drop back...
Straight line, a standard one will do a 1/4 mile in about 14.9 (roughly) Air Filter and de-cat will lose about 1/2 a second off this in most cases.
I heard a story from a guy at the place where I swap my tyres over that his friend had a punto GT running about 170+ bhp and had tried to race me. Coincidence has it that he was saying that this cup (mine) had owned him. guy from garage told him that he knew the car, and mentioned it when i was up there the other week. I didn't know much about it, as I can't even remember the incident. LOL
/y0z
*BINGO*Not when it's running three pistons in four cylinders
I was waiting for this.
tart
LOL
/y0z
... and we all say GT's are unreliable *winds*
Forget all this bull**** about "quicker car this" and "straight line that", the 172 and a tuned GT are close enough in terms of speed to have it come down to driver ability.
Did I mention I beat a CTR in a straight line from a standing start to over a ton the other day? This is because he was a monkey of a driver - he should have killed me.
On a track with the same driver the 172 is significantly quicker.
On a road it comes down to the driver and in most cases the driver's stupidity for exceeding a speed limit or safety buffer by a certain amount.
this is what I would have thought, and as soon as you throw a bend in there, it would be bye bye fiat.
My old 1.8 16v gave jimma a good for his money around bruntingthorpe sprint circuit.
He had the straight line speed to catch me but not quite enough to overtake me, and i had the corner speed to pull enough for him not to catch me on the straights.
I would put money on a 172/182 95% of the time. You would have to have a mental GT to test the 172/182. But then again, i still think a 182/172 would prevail, as would a williams.
/y0z
That was quite good fun actually, have to love the GT's inherent understeering ability to sniff out the edge of the track around the 100+ mph bend toward the airplane at B'thorpe! I was in a standard GT as well
I was going for less weight!!
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y94...g/IMG_2587.jpg
http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y94...g/IMG_2588.jpg
I agree - or exceeding their abilty in the red mist.
On track there would be no question. 172 would walk it.
/y0z
Just on the bit of a CTR vs a GT to 100, wasnt there a video on here of a seb setup GT doing 100 in 14ish seconds? thats 2 ish seconds faster than a CTR? and a Clio 172/182 to 80, in a line i will add, will lose to a seb GT IMO.
I Can agree that drivers themselves make a big difference, but if you go by the figures, a GT will beat a 182/172 and a CTR to 100 i think. But bends are a different matter! give the GT a bend the size of Dover and it will understear! :-)
lol
Going by the figures mate, the GT is wayyyyy behind to 100.
If you have any car care related questions, ask me in the Cleaning/Detailing section.
it definitaly depends on the drivers ability! im NOT trying to make the clio look sh*t or anything, i know exactly how quick they are.. there was a big gap between the 172 and me coz i launched really really well, opened the gap in 1st and 2nd gear.. this is where the 'torque' talks, not BHP
i ran 1/4 mile in 15.3s in standard plus it was missfiring when it boosted above 0.8bar... power was lacking soon as i hit 3rd gear
everythings sorted now, expecting mid 14's
A Seb set up GT mate. There is a vid on here of one getting there in 14 seconds.lol
Going by the figures mate, the GT is wayyyyy behind to 100.
Posting Permissions
