Johnny, I'm getting just short of 28mpg from mine but that's mostly motorway miles. Agreed about the blacked out windows. They make reversing in the dark a real chore. I've fitted a K & N airfilter to mine, it improves the sound.
Why I sold my Trophy
- Thread starter Johnnytheboy
- Start date
Looking good Johnny.. Rude not to have it in ASBO Green! 8)
I would love to experience one. The looks have certainly grown on me, with the exception of a couple of features.
Do keep us updated as time goes on!
I would love to experience one. The looks have certainly grown on me, with the exception of a couple of features.
Do keep us updated as time goes on!
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2006
- Messages
- 494
- Reaction score
- 0
Looks lovely buddy, if I could afford it I'd change to one tomorrow.
I'm very envious 8) :mrgreen:
I'm very envious 8) :mrgreen:
Renaultsport
ClioTrophy Moderator
I want one!!
=P~
=P~
- Thread starter
- #26
OK, now I've done about 1,000 miles in it, I'm starting to get used to the RS. Here's my thoughts.
Good points vs.the Trophy
1. The noise. Even thinking about it gives me a semi. I drove it through a tunnel today and it obligingly popped really loudly when I changed gear. TBH, even if everything else about the RS was rubbish, this alone would make it worth the money.
2. The torque. I have posted on my Focus forum that I really don't see the point in revving it that hard, as if you change up at 4,000 rpm, you stay in the power band. Overtaking takes no 'planning' at all, you just go. Which is nice.
3. The attention. A lot of people will stop and stare at it, and I am suddenly very popular with my neighbours when it's car wash time! It has a lot of 'presence'. Saying that, in the Trophy, if someone stared at you, you knew they knew a lot about cars.
4. The gizmos. Having just used voice control and the stereo to make my first bluetooth phone call yesterday with a single button press, I feel like I'm living in the future! Except I really miss cruise control which I don't have.
Bad points v. the Trophy
1. Handling and ride. Ride is definitely harsher and less sophisticated, unsurpisingly. Handling. I can't criticise it per se, as I've yet to reach a limit but it doesn't have the Trophy's fluidity, and because it's got so much grunt you spend your time on windy roads gingerly lining it up for a straight bit of road, then accelerating. Rather than seducing the road ahead, it's kind of like hitting it with a mallet.
2. Fun factor. Because it's so quick, you actually feel like you're going slower, as you drive it at less of its potential most of the time, if that makes sense. Then you look at the speedo... The fact it's a lot bigger doesn't help on the kind of roads I use. And the flat torque delivery means flooring it through the gears doesn't have the sense of occasion that the Clio did, as the '5k kick' pinned you to your seat.
Good points vs.the Trophy
1. The noise. Even thinking about it gives me a semi. I drove it through a tunnel today and it obligingly popped really loudly when I changed gear. TBH, even if everything else about the RS was rubbish, this alone would make it worth the money.
2. The torque. I have posted on my Focus forum that I really don't see the point in revving it that hard, as if you change up at 4,000 rpm, you stay in the power band. Overtaking takes no 'planning' at all, you just go. Which is nice.
3. The attention. A lot of people will stop and stare at it, and I am suddenly very popular with my neighbours when it's car wash time! It has a lot of 'presence'. Saying that, in the Trophy, if someone stared at you, you knew they knew a lot about cars.
4. The gizmos. Having just used voice control and the stereo to make my first bluetooth phone call yesterday with a single button press, I feel like I'm living in the future! Except I really miss cruise control which I don't have.
Bad points v. the Trophy
1. Handling and ride. Ride is definitely harsher and less sophisticated, unsurpisingly. Handling. I can't criticise it per se, as I've yet to reach a limit but it doesn't have the Trophy's fluidity, and because it's got so much grunt you spend your time on windy roads gingerly lining it up for a straight bit of road, then accelerating. Rather than seducing the road ahead, it's kind of like hitting it with a mallet.
2. Fun factor. Because it's so quick, you actually feel like you're going slower, as you drive it at less of its potential most of the time, if that makes sense. Then you look at the speedo... The fact it's a lot bigger doesn't help on the kind of roads I use. And the flat torque delivery means flooring it through the gears doesn't have the sense of occasion that the Clio did, as the '5k kick' pinned you to your seat.
Completely agree with your write up Johnny, it isn't as much fun and the car still feels huge after more than 5,000 miles. I reckon I could drive my Trophy faster on country lanes. On the motorway the car is very good and most of my miles are motorway ones. I think Jeremy Clarkson kinda hit the nail on the head when he gave it the muscle car of the year award in Top Gear magazine. Are you going to go for the Superchips/GGR340 upgrade? Its tempting.
- Thread starter
- #30
@marrow and corneyman: I think my experiences so far make me think simply upping the power wouldn't make it any more fun, having said that, a less linear delivery might. But wasn't that what I said I didn't want in the next car? Am contemplating a couple of cosmetic changes, otherwise leaving standard.
Also, I like having a warranty!
One more bad point, the mpg is now at 23.3 :evil:
Also, I like having a warranty!
One more bad point, the mpg is now at 23.3 :evil:
Ive driven quite a few of these,seeing as i work for Ford 
Awesome cars to drive,sold a lot of them too,see quite a few around in my area now. I would have one,but must admit felt a bit gutted when the clio 200 nurburgring vid came out...
Awesome cars to drive,sold a lot of them too,see quite a few around in my area now. I would have one,but must admit felt a bit gutted when the clio 200 nurburgring vid came out...
23mpg is that combined or with a regular heavy foot?
The Focus ST likes a drink too.
Talking mpg, the new Golf R has ditched the heavy V6 for a heavily tuned and lighter 4 cyclinder turbo. It apparently will average 34mpg on the combined cycle and has CO2 emmisions of just 199g/km - which is the same as the T I think? Reviewed in this months EVO. Looks very impressive but pretty pricey at ~£30k.
The Focus ST likes a drink too.
Talking mpg, the new Golf R has ditched the heavy V6 for a heavily tuned and lighter 4 cyclinder turbo. It apparently will average 34mpg on the combined cycle and has CO2 emmisions of just 199g/km - which is the same as the T I think? Reviewed in this months EVO. Looks very impressive but pretty pricey at ~£30k.
Is this the ring vid u mean ash?
http://www.vidoemo.com/yvideo.php?clio- ... uRpV3BWSzQ
Impressive Clio as usual..
http://www.vidoemo.com/yvideo.php?clio- ... uRpV3BWSzQ
Impressive Clio as usual..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ae4RqTW5UDU
Thats the video i meant,however,its not filmed at the ring...sorry my mistake! Bit gutting though,RS was all hyped up about the revoknuckle etc etc...then that came out
Still think theyre nice cars,and they do go really well,exhaust tone is fantastic,havnt had many back either,couple of bits here and there I would have one,but theres quite a few around so the ''first time arousal'' has been and gone lol
Thats the video i meant,however,its not filmed at the ring...sorry my mistake! Bit gutting though,RS was all hyped up about the revoknuckle etc etc...then that came out
Still think theyre nice cars,and they do go really well,exhaust tone is fantastic,havnt had many back either,couple of bits here and there
I would have one,but theres quite a few around so the ''first time arousal'' has been and gone loli personally dont think it looks anywhere near as good as the trophy....Not keen on the front end at all IMHO....
This "revoknuckle" thing is not a new thing, it's a very similar, though not as complex a set up that the Celica GT4 ST205 used back in 1994 when it came out, it was called "super-strut" and was homologated for the WRC ST205, though it was never used on Safari events, not strong enough, only tarmac events IIRC.
In fact most FWD Celica's sold in Japan had the "super-strut" suspension system. In Europe they employed a cheaper standard Macpherson strut design as European roads are much poorer than Japanese roads meaning the "super-strut" suspension lasted about 70K miles before needing replacing at considerable cost.
In fact most FWD Celica's sold in Japan had the "super-strut" suspension system. In Europe they employed a cheaper standard Macpherson strut design as European roads are much poorer than Japanese roads meaning the "super-strut" suspension lasted about 70K miles before needing replacing at considerable cost.
loovely motor, am considering one myself TBH but as commented earlier i cannot bear the fake vents. Its not enough to put me off but i really do not like that about the RS.
I have been in one though and agree the torque and noise are immense. Doesnt feel as supple as the T from the passenger seat, and only when above ahem...cough mph did it really show its extra legs in the power stakes.
Great upgrade though
I have been in one though and agree the torque and noise are immense. Doesnt feel as supple as the T from the passenger seat, and only when above ahem...cough mph did it really show its extra legs in the power stakes.
Great upgrade though