Renault Clio 182 or Seat Ibiza Cupra TDI?
Stumbled across this thread and had to add my bit.....
I agree it's not really a viable comparison, especially if your thinking in 'pure' hot hatch terms.
I run a Cupra TDI set up for fast road and track, 202bhp 300ft/lb (Revo), Sachs clutch, uprated and lowered suspension professionally set up, exhaust etc.... (enthusiastic day to day road driving returns average 40mpg or mid to low 20s on the track).
Fast yes, good chassis no. It doesn't matter what you do to the Cupra it'll never handle even close to a 182 let alone the trophy. Whilst a light car overall, the diesel lump up front is heavy making it impossible to totally dial out even with trick suspension. My car is probably as alive at the rear as it is possible to get without stripping out interior and trying to lose weight up front but it still doesn't come close to a 182 especially in Cup or trophy guise.
I genuinely did choose between the Clio 182 cup, Cupra TDI and Cooper S, and drove all three. For me and my day to day driving the Cupra was the best all-rounder. The power does bring a smile to your face and point to point (on the road) the car is very quick if driven smoothly, but the handling doesn't raise a smile. It's safe a predictable but never alive or rewarding.
If I didn't drive a fair few miles and fuel cost (with enthusiastic driving) wasn't an issue, I'd have a Trophy over my Cupra instantly. Especially when it comes to doing track days. As it is, it's a 'sensible' hot hatch, a bit better bolted together than a Clio, but not even close in terms of chassis capability.
The amount of bull***t about which is faster, what people have had out of their cars, what they've 'beaten' is laughable. My car IS rolling road tested (okay I'll admit they're hardly an exact science). Does it torque steer, YES. Is it prone to understeer, YES. Is it terrible in the wet, NO - thats s**t tires and similar driving. Does it have loads of lag, NO - Revo largely takes care of that although there is obvioulsly a bit at low revs. Is it faster than a 182 (including Trophy) in a straight line, YES by a fair bit, but so are loads of cars that are seriously crap!
On the track I have 'beaten' faster cars and been beaten by 'slower' cars. At the end of the day it's the driver who makes the difference. Give the two cars to a professional driver and they'll make a 182 sing and the Cupra cry. I seriously doubt there is anywhere a stock Cupra could touch a stock 182 if driven to their potential
I agree it's not really a viable comparison, especially if your thinking in 'pure' hot hatch terms.
I run a Cupra TDI set up for fast road and track, 202bhp 300ft/lb (Revo), Sachs clutch, uprated and lowered suspension professionally set up, exhaust etc.... (enthusiastic day to day road driving returns average 40mpg or mid to low 20s on the track).
Fast yes, good chassis no. It doesn't matter what you do to the Cupra it'll never handle even close to a 182 let alone the trophy. Whilst a light car overall, the diesel lump up front is heavy making it impossible to totally dial out even with trick suspension. My car is probably as alive at the rear as it is possible to get without stripping out interior and trying to lose weight up front but it still doesn't come close to a 182 especially in Cup or trophy guise.
I genuinely did choose between the Clio 182 cup, Cupra TDI and Cooper S, and drove all three. For me and my day to day driving the Cupra was the best all-rounder. The power does bring a smile to your face and point to point (on the road) the car is very quick if driven smoothly, but the handling doesn't raise a smile. It's safe a predictable but never alive or rewarding.
If I didn't drive a fair few miles and fuel cost (with enthusiastic driving) wasn't an issue, I'd have a Trophy over my Cupra instantly. Especially when it comes to doing track days. As it is, it's a 'sensible' hot hatch, a bit better bolted together than a Clio, but not even close in terms of chassis capability.
The amount of bull***t about which is faster, what people have had out of their cars, what they've 'beaten' is laughable. My car IS rolling road tested (okay I'll admit they're hardly an exact science). Does it torque steer, YES. Is it prone to understeer, YES. Is it terrible in the wet, NO - thats s**t tires and similar driving. Does it have loads of lag, NO - Revo largely takes care of that although there is obvioulsly a bit at low revs. Is it faster than a 182 (including Trophy) in a straight line, YES by a fair bit, but so are loads of cars that are seriously crap!
On the track I have 'beaten' faster cars and been beaten by 'slower' cars. At the end of the day it's the driver who makes the difference. Give the two cars to a professional driver and they'll make a 182 sing and the Cupra cry. I seriously doubt there is anywhere a stock Cupra could touch a stock 182 if driven to their potential
Interesting read mate and some thing I can relate to coming from a revo'd Ibiza Tdi 130, running eibach suspension 17" wheels and S3 brakes.
However I'm going to have to disagree with you in a few areas, basically the engines are gutless below 2000rpm when the turbo kicks in with an almighty bang (enough to shear my fly wheel bolts and ruin my clutch) then after 4000rpm there pretty lethargic to the point where I found shifting at 4k the optimum point for quick progress.
Also wet weather handling is definatley atrocious, no matter how smooth a line you take or how gently you feed the power in it really is understeer central, I can't believe you've openly admitted it has a flawed chassis with torque steer and understeer yet insist wet weather performance is down to shit tyres and poor driving? Last time I checked wet weather seemed to exagerate any flaws not make them disapear.
Don't get me wrong mate I loved mine, and if they ever designed one that handled as good as a trophy I'd probably buy it.
Steve
However I'm going to have to disagree with you in a few areas, basically the engines are gutless below 2000rpm when the turbo kicks in with an almighty bang (enough to shear my fly wheel bolts and ruin my clutch) then after 4000rpm there pretty lethargic to the point where I found shifting at 4k the optimum point for quick progress.
Also wet weather handling is definatley atrocious, no matter how smooth a line you take or how gently you feed the power in it really is understeer central, I can't believe you've openly admitted it has a flawed chassis with torque steer and understeer yet insist wet weather performance is down to shit tyres and poor driving? Last time I checked wet weather seemed to exagerate any flaws not make them disapear.
Don't get me wrong mate I loved mine, and if they ever designed one that handled as good as a trophy I'd probably buy it.
Steve