General Hi! What are brava's bravo's like?

[pandamonius_maximus]

Hey there! I have summed up the courage to leave the panda section for a freind of mine! His name is phily ( lol). He is considering buying one but wants to know what theyre like to drive. Are they quick? Wants something a bit more pokey than a clio really, in fact alot quicker . What would be the best one for him? Are they difficult to get parts (replacement/performance) for? Sorry to ask so many questions, just trying to give him a picture of what they are like. I expect plenty of biassed replies lol ( i know i would in the panda section) but negative points are just as welcome.
Cheers guys!
Si

 

[bridges]

I would first look at a 1.6 16v for a good turn of speed they are just over 100bhp so lively enough. what clio did they have? if it was a 1.2 8v mpfi then they are not that quick 60 bhp the 1.4spfi 8v is 75bhp but both are lighter than the Bravo/brava. the bravo/Brava will feel like a rolls after an early generation clio. I think my HGT is in the same build as my mums 52 reg clio 1.2 16v

Then I would get the 1.8HLX as these are about 115bhp. depends how much speed you want.

I had the HGT 20v this i would highly reccomend is only available as the Bravo. it has the torque. and a beautiful engine noise. Strangely it does not feel that fast until you look at the speedo. On standard springs it feels more of a tourer rather than an involved drivers car. I quite liked this though. These however are thirsty motors though and harder to work on as the 5th cylinder restricts engine bay space.

there are loads of Bravo's Brava's in the scrap yards round me so parts are not a problem. Plus the cars tend to share a lot of components with other models in the fiat range.

 

[dillinger39]

most clios are not as quick as the 1.2 16valve bravo


unless they do 1.6's and above. the old model had a 2.0l 16 valve model and that was a very nippy little car. am only going from the performance of it at harewood speed hill climb there though

 

[Hellcat]

Don't forget the diesel versions. The Bravo JTD is a 50mpg+ go-kart, with 5 seats and a boot! Parts are still cheap and readily available. Not really any big problems with these cars. Any issues which are common have usually simple fixes which are well documented (rear wiper, leaking sunroof, airbag light)

JTD Brava is a bit more family orientated with softer ride and more doors/bigger boot.

edit: p.s. welcome to the rest of the forum

 

[pandamonius_maximus]

Thanks for the feedback, should be enough so far for my mate to think on. He had a 1.2 clio so not too hard to beat really lol! Sorry phil.
Si

 

[bridges]

most clios are not as quick as the 1.2 16valve bravo


unless they do 1.6's and above. the old model had a 2.0l 16 valve model and that was a very nippy little car. am only going from the performance of it at harewood speed hill climb there though

Old school hotter clio was the 1.4 75bhp so considering its weight advantage i would say it would be almost in the ball park of an 80bhp 1.25 Bravo the 1.8 8vRSI clio 115bhp would wipe the floor with a 1.6 16v bravo-brava more so below 80 mph because of much lighter weight. Old school Clio 1.8 16v 137bhp would be about the same as an HGT but they have poor torque. The williams was bored to a 2.0 150bhp and on a twisty road you would wonder where it had gone. Mind you reliability is poor.

Later clio's started to ditch the 8valve motors and go for the 16v ones. My mums is a 75bhp 1.2 16v unit and it would not be far behind the 1.25 bravo-a
Then there is the 100bhp 1.4 16v clio which would be similar to the 1.6 16v bravo-a and would be quicker than a 1.2 bravo-a
The 1.6 16v is 115bhp so similar to an HLX
the 2.0 16v is 172 bhp and would pull away from my old HGT the newer variant due to weight increase is 182 and now 192bhp

In short all but the early 1.2 1.4 clio's are not as quick as the bravo-a 1.2

These though probably were a high proportion of Clio sales.

 

[jug]

i think if you're going to get a bravo you should get a 1.6 or 1.8 HLX. only because the HLX is a much better overall package and the extra costs are very small compared to an SX.

but they aren't 'great' cars tbh, for class and era handling is average, performance is average, build quality is below average, reliablity is below average. but theyt're bargains to buy now, and parts are cheap and plentiful, they're easy to work on, and they have dated better than many cars from that era. the interior less so than the exterior, but inside is still a pleasant place to be.

compared to a pre2000 clio a bravo is much much better. the old clios weren't safe, i've nearly died in one more than once. you feel safer in a bravo, especially at speed on twisty B roads.

 

[ice1841]

i have a bravo 1.2 16v and there very good quite ippy great to drive and another thin is its f.....kin great on juice

 

[bridges]

compared to a pre2000 clio a bravo is much much better. the old clios weren't safe, i've nearly died in one more than once. you feel safer in a bravo, especially at speed on twisty B roads.

Hit the nail on the head. Myself and my girlfriends dad have several motors. One of which is a 1.8 16v clio J reg it has uprated suspension full exhaust decat etc. chipped. Is basically just a noisy bumpy been tin. hit a squirrel and you would be dead Fun though.

 

[klemster]

i think if you're going to get a bravo you should get a 1.6 or 1.8 HLX. only because the HLX is a much better overall package and the extra costs are very small compared to an SX.

but they aren't 'great' cars tbh, for class and era handling is average, performance is average, build quality is below average, reliablity is below average. but theyt're bargains to buy now, and parts are cheap and plentiful, they're easy to work on, and they have dated better than many cars from that era. the interior less so than the exterior, but inside is still a pleasant place to be.

I have a 2001 1.2 sx and i have to admit im delighted with it!! Ok so its not a golf, but id much rather it to a focus or a clio!! Styling inside and out is very good..the interior seems to wear well ..it doesnt have light grey cheap plastics light most toyotas and for a 1.2 it really isn't bad!! its pretty nippy!! I did get my sx for peanuts (€3750)..it doesn't have all the extras but i've added a few things (spoiler,foglights, marea centre console etc) and they were pretty easy to do!!the one really annoying thing is that on every Bravo, the handles seem to get really sh*ty, i've got new handles but they are sitting in a box..not lookin forward to putting them on, they look kind of tricky to fit!! I did drive a 2001 corrolla lately and i really thought it was rubbish!! I honestly do think a Bravo is a really good buy!!

 

[jug]

handles are very easy to fit so dont be scared. getting the shorter of the 2 metal rods on is the most tricky part. there's only 1 nut (behind door card), 1 screw (on side or door) and 2 metal rods holding it on.

and dont be so hasty in thinking a bravo is better than a focus, it looks better but if you drove a focus you'd soon see why it was a class leader for so long.

 

[bridges]

Agreed, The Focus is spot on. Not a fan of the astra though.

 

[jug]

no me neither, the astra chassis is probably a tiny bit more capable than the bravo, and the interior is a tiny bit better quality, but its a boring car overall and doesn't have any sexyness compared to a bravo, and its far too common.

when i wanted a new car a few months ago i was seriously struggling to choose between a focus, astra, bravo, 306, almera or a bmw compact. there's just so much choice in the small/medium 2nd hand market! i chose the bravo because it looked better than any of the others, and it was cheaper. i very nearly went with the bmw for the driving experience, but costs made it not worth while, and the focus was my second choice but they're a bit too common and dont quite look right somehow. the bravo was in 3rd place and it was the best choice overall. I'm pleased i went for it, i wouldn't have got the same spec and condition for the same price with any of the others except the 306, but the 306 interior is such a let down that even a gti-6 wasn't enough to change my mind. An almera is very reliable and drives surprisingly well, but it doesn't have any style inside or out.

if i could make a mutant out of them all i'd have to get the rear wheel drive and engine from the beemer, the focus chassis, the bravo bodywork, the 306gti-6 gearbox, and the almera's reliablity and build quality. that would be one hell of a car!

 

[klemster]

ya i haven't driven one so i cant really say that!!but the stlying isn't good on the focus...and finally ford got rid of the little clock in the dash!! the bmw compact never took off in ireland, you rarely see one!!my first car was a 95 peugeot 106 that was some car..always have a soft spot for them!! the 306 do look pretty good!

 

[dillinger39]

a 1.2 can be remapped (unlike a 1.6) and then you can add a sports/race exhaust, decat, air filter (not the K&n 57I though) and allsorts of other fun devices making it upto the same bhp (and more than) of the 1.6 bravo.

so then you get all the advantages of a 1.2 engine (less petrol consumption)
with the speed of a 1.6. cracking that i would think.

There is some one on the Fiat Boo forum with a 1.2 tuned to 115bhp now that would be something nice, lol.



like to see the newer renault clio's with a 1.2 and the 1.4's beat that and am sure you could annoy the hell out of a 1.6 car as well especially when you tell him "all this speed and in a 1.2, and my car looks nicer".


true shame you can't turbo the 1.2 bravo that would be interesting. especially if the car is remapped as well that would all add to the flavour i bet.

 

[bridges]

A tuned 1.2 will not be anywhere near as economical as a stock 1.2 as to make it go faster you need more air and more fuel. I doubt that a heavily tuned 1.2 would be
1: as economical as a stock 1.6
2: as reliable as a stock 1.6
3: develop the torque of a 1.6
4: as nice a place to be as a 1.6 as the 1,2 will have a full system and rev its nuts off to develop power.


A renault 1.2 clio is probably as tunable if you throw cash at it.

I believe in tuning to get the best out of your car and styling to personalise it to yourself.

However you must ask why spend hundreds of pounds tuning a 1.2 to have the bhp of a stock 1.8 And not the better suspension, brakes until all modified at extra cost It would be beaten by a 1.8 and if you declare all those mods to the insurance probably costs more too.

 

[cubixgames]

Hi there,

Ive got a Subaru WRX, a 1.2 Corsa, and did have a Renault 5.

Ive still got my Subaru dont even try to compare speed but ive also not too long ago be came the owner of a 1.6 Bravo, Now i was thinking of modding this car and selling it on, But after owning it and driving it Im most defo going to be keeping it, Little boy racer cars like Clios and Corsa not including GSI dont really hold up any where close to them, My misses has a 2lt Turbo Rover and it keeps up nice and well with that and thats got a lot and lot of kick, Which is what she is getting for buying that,

After i found her a lovley 1.8HLX in Bright Yelllow for £395 in the adtrader as well very disopointed in her,

I would get a bravo any day, Aint had it trow its MOT yet so not sure how bad they our at that time of year its due soon thou so suppose im going to find out.

 

[PhilWalker]

Had our 2000 Brava 2 years now, 1.8 ELX 115, and she is a joy to own.

Only thing done in 2 years is CV boot needed chaging before MOT last year.

Needs a new 3rd brake light and headlight lens for next years, but a real pleasure to own and drive.

If you find a good one, grab it!!!

 

[dillinger39]

what is the 1.8 and 1.6 brava like on petrol (petrol guys only though, i know the jtd's are really superb on fuel already)

 

[bridges]

1.6 is quite good actually, well much better than my 20v