Clio V6

[S18DMW]

I'm considering a Clio V6 as a potential replacement to my current car, only one question which I'm sure has been asled 1000 times,

What are the running costs like as it will be my day to day car? Practicality of it doesn't bother me as 2 seats is plenty and I rarely put much in the boot of my current car apart from a jacket.

Thanks

[Sammyturbo]

v6clio.net will help you out

[AliV6]

Other than the cambelt and consumables (Disks & tyres) it's barely any more cost than my older Renualtsport 172's! etc.

Go for it!

[FactoryPilot]

As said above, running costs identical to 172/182 etc. The only slight negatives regarding everyday use are, the turning circle is rubbish and the extra width in tight car parks can be a pain, but other than that go for it. I can't see them dropping much lower myself, so could be a good time to buy..... in fact, I might get another one myself at some point!

Edited by FactoryPilot on Thursday 22 July 08:25

[Sammyturbo]

Mine is up for sale at the minute if either of you are interested

http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/1890724.htm

[AshBaldry]

Ph1 the better buy?

[Sammyturbo]

AshBaldry said:

Ph1 the better buy?

Depends on your budget mainly I think and also which one you prefer the look of!!

[RobM77]

I may be wrong here, but I'm sure that a friend of mine got a rather frightening quote for a new exhaust.

Great cars though - I've driven two on fairly extensive drives. Loads of character and really enjoyable to drive. My only problem was that I didn't fit behind the wheel properly.

[Sammyturbo]

RobM77 said:

I may be wrong here, but I'm sure that a friend of mine got a rather frightening quote for a new exhaust.

Great cars though - I've driven two on fairly extensive drives. Loads of character and really enjoyable to drive. My only problem was that I didn't fit behind the wheel properly.

All parts for the Clio V6 are expensive

[RobM77]

Sammyturbo said:

RobM77 said:

I may be wrong here, but I'm sure that a friend of mine got a rather frightening quote for a new exhaust.

Great cars though - I've driven two on fairly extensive drives. Loads of character and really enjoyable to drive. My only problem was that I didn't fit behind the wheel properly.

All parts for the Clio V6 are expensive

Including the operation cutting two feet of my legs and stretching my arms in order to drive one

[Sammyturbo]

RobM77 said:

Sammyturbo said:

RobM77 said:

I may be wrong here, but I'm sure that a friend of mine got a rather frightening quote for a new exhaust.

Great cars though - I've driven two on fairly extensive drives. Loads of character and really enjoyable to drive. My only problem was that I didn't fit behind the wheel properly.

All parts for the Clio V6 are expensive

Including the operation cutting two feet of my legs and stretching my arms in order to drive one

[AliV6]

God only knows what a new exhaust costs, but it wouldn't bother me if that was upgraded. I've done so on mine.

Ph2 was the only option when i went to buy, it looks nicer, it's more refinded and it's well...newer. That was my box to be ticked.

[Ginger goblin]

AshBaldry said:

Ph1 the better buy?

IMO yes. The original and the more hardcore.

Who needs climate control when you've got a window?!!

[RobM77]

Ginger goblin said:

AshBaldry said:

Ph1 the better buy?

IMO yes. The original and the more hardcore.

Who needs climate control when you've got a window?!!

The mk2 255 was generally considered the better car though wasn't it?

[anonymous-user]

RobM77 said:

Ginger goblin said:

AshBaldry said:

Ph1 the better buy?

IMO yes. The original and the more hardcore.

Who needs climate control when you've got a window?!!

The mk2 255 was generally considered the better car though wasn't it?

Yes, the ph1 V6 has only 227 bhp and the added weight from the engine makes it only 0.5 seconds faster to 60 than a 172, even though it has 55bhp more. It also handles rather poorly and I'm sure I've read that a 172 Cup will outdo it on track.

The the 255 gets to 60 in 5.9 seconds and apparently handles a lot better than the ph1.

[RobM77]

MSTRBKR said:

RobM77 said:

Ginger goblin said:

AshBaldry said:

Ph1 the better buy?

IMO yes. The original and the more hardcore.

Who needs climate control when you've got a window?!!

The mk2 255 was generally considered the better car though wasn't it?

Yes, the ph1 V6 has only 227 bhp and the added weight from the engine makes it only 0.5 seconds faster to 60 than a 172, even though it has 55bhp more. It also handles rather poorly and I'm sure I've read that a 172 Cup will outdo it on track.

The the 255 gets to 60 in 5.9 seconds and apparently handles a lot better than the ph1.

I expect both cars would be troubled by a contempary Clio hot hatch such as a 172/182 etc. Road cars aren't really about lap times though, and I'd rather have a V6 because of the huge character and interesting balance that the car's got.

I've only ever driven the 255 (I've spent a fair amount of time behind the wheel of two examples), so can't comment directly on a comparison, but so far as I understood it the mk2 was better received by the press.

[anonymous-user]

RobM77 said:

MSTRBKR said:

RobM77 said:

Ginger goblin said:

AshBaldry said:

Ph1 the better buy?

IMO yes. The original and the more hardcore.

Who needs climate control when you've got a window?!!

The mk2 255 was generally considered the better car though wasn't it?

Yes, the ph1 V6 has only 227 bhp and the added weight from the engine makes it only 0.5 seconds faster to 60 than a 172, even though it has 55bhp more. It also handles rather poorly and I'm sure I've read that a 172 Cup will outdo it on track.

The the 255 gets to 60 in 5.9 seconds and apparently handles a lot better than the ph1.

I expect both cars would be troubled by a contempary Clio hot hatch such as a 172/182 etc. Road cars aren't really about lap times though, and I'd rather have a V6 because of the huge character and interesting balance that the car's got.

I've only ever driven the 255 (I've spent a fair amount of time behind the wheel of two examples), so can't comment directly on a comparison, but so far as I understood it the mk2 was better received by the press.

Agreed, but if it's slower on a track you'll find it won't be that good on twisty A/B roads either.

[RobM77]

MSTRBKR said:

RobM77 said:

MSTRBKR said:

RobM77 said:

Ginger goblin said:

AshBaldry said:

Ph1 the better buy?

IMO yes. The original and the more hardcore.

Who needs climate control when you've got a window?!!

The mk2 255 was generally considered the better car though wasn't it?

Yes, the ph1 V6 has only 227 bhp and the added weight from the engine makes it only 0.5 seconds faster to 60 than a 172, even though it has 55bhp more. It also handles rather poorly and I'm sure I've read that a 172 Cup will outdo it on track.

The the 255 gets to 60 in 5.9 seconds and apparently handles a lot better than the ph1.

I expect both cars would be troubled by a contempary Clio hot hatch such as a 172/182 etc. Road cars aren't really about lap times though, and I'd rather have a V6 because of the huge character and interesting balance that the car's got.

I've only ever driven the 255 (I've spent a fair amount of time behind the wheel of two examples), so can't comment directly on a comparison, but so far as I understood it the mk2 was better received by the press.

Agreed, but if it's slower on a track you'll find it won't be that good on twisty A/B roads either.

What do you mean by good?

[anonymous-user]

RobM77 said:

What do you mean by good?

Sorry I meant that the things that make it (ph1 V6) slower on track might also make it slower on public roads through demanding corners.

Edited by MSTRBKR on Monday 9th August 17:26

[RobM77]

MSTRBKR said:

RobM77 said:

What do you mean by good?

Sorry I meant that the things that make it (ph1 V6) slower on track might also make it slower on public roads through demanding corners.

Edited by MSTRBKR on Monday 9th August 17:26

Sure, but of course being slower doesn't necessarily make a car not as good. I'd rather own and drive a Clio V6 than a 172/182/200.