OP
OP
Good post Ben, and probably one of the best people to comment on the topic after owning the cars you have.
General How a M-Jet 130 stands against a 182
- Thread starter Alex_gregory_uk
- Start date
Currently reading:
General How a M-Jet 130 stands against a 182
Here's my quick review of the 197, which I first did for FCCUK:
I remember seeing the Mk3 Clio for the first time and thinking it looked much more mature and like an evolution of the Mk1 than the Mk2. I had a good look around the basic car when it arrived early in 2006: it's a bigger, noticeably higher quality car than its immediate predecessor.
The 197 was unveiled sometime after and something immediately clicked with me. I was a big fan of the Mk1 16V / Williams of old - and I never quite enjoyed the Mk2 172 / 182 as much as a visual package, despite owning two of them. But with the 197 the best bits were back: proper fat arches for the front and rear, plus a subtle rear diffuser and arch vents in place of the Mk1's trademark bonnet bulge.
That these visual touches are for a purpose adds to the attraction: wider tracks and front end cooling, with no rear spoiler! It's safe to say that the 197 is a looker then, but very much with a focus on the task in hand - it's a subtle nod to those in the know.
Many of the reviews I read before deciding on a 197 were very enthusiastic, but a few comparisons with turbocharged rivals (e.g. Cooper S Mk2) highlighted a "lack" of torque. What you read is factually accurate; I could almost describe my 197 as an S2000 engine in a Clio. But even after owning a fairly muscular turbo diesel before the 197, the 197 feels torquey - even at low revs. Don't be mislead about this: it won't slay all comers at 2,000rpm, but it's potent even for an NA engine of its size in average driving due to the constant VVT (not just over certain revs). Quite noticeably more torquey than the 172 / 182 incarnations of this engine in my view.
Clearly, the real excitement begins at 5,000rpm though. It's true that the 6 gear ratios are short - once you're up into the rev range, a change up will always have you in the power zone again. My 197 has the shorter 5th / 6th gear ratios that have been lengthened on very recent 197s, but then 3,600rpm at 70mph is about the same as you get in a Mk1 Civic Type-R. In truth, it's quite hard to cruise at legal leptons: the race-car-like buzz and noise urge you on. It's also quite fun to drive around primed for action at high revs, which is surely the only way to deal with these modern turdo-diesel upstarts!
Straight-line speed feels good... broadly the same as any of the Clios from 16V through to 182. I think people often overestimate the difference a second here or there makes - and underestimate the variability in power output from these RenaultSport engines. If you need to know: I think a 197 is as quick off the mark as any and is easier to keep on the boil. Braking is outstanding, courtesy of some tasty Brembos up front and a good characteristic carried over from previous models.
The handling is also excellent - really capturing some of the spirit of the Williams in its ability to soak up bumps, but grip with the best of them. I don't think I've ever been in a better handling road car than a 197. From a practicality point of view, the long travel pays off as you cruise over speed bumps that many hot hatches weep at. Fuel economy of 33mpg is as quoted, unlike many cars in recent memory that need very gentle coaxing to get anywhere near the manufacturer's figures.
I'm a little more interested in practical items these days. Parking is excellent (although you need to watch the width of the car) and the interior is significantly better build and insulated than before. For most people, this will do as an only car. I'm a little disappointed at the basic spec though: a weedy stereo, no xenons and other goodies that will no doubt become standard over time. Still, this is a car for driving is it not?
I don't drive very often and we only need one car nowadays. It's happy to be an easy and comfortable drive around town and on longer journeys, but it's also delighted to be totally thrashed.
Therein lies the appeal of a 197: a good balance of most things, but pretty extreme when you want it to be.
I remember seeing the Mk3 Clio for the first time and thinking it looked much more mature and like an evolution of the Mk1 than the Mk2. I had a good look around the basic car when it arrived early in 2006: it's a bigger, noticeably higher quality car than its immediate predecessor.
The 197 was unveiled sometime after and something immediately clicked with me. I was a big fan of the Mk1 16V / Williams of old - and I never quite enjoyed the Mk2 172 / 182 as much as a visual package, despite owning two of them. But with the 197 the best bits were back: proper fat arches for the front and rear, plus a subtle rear diffuser and arch vents in place of the Mk1's trademark bonnet bulge.
That these visual touches are for a purpose adds to the attraction: wider tracks and front end cooling, with no rear spoiler! It's safe to say that the 197 is a looker then, but very much with a focus on the task in hand - it's a subtle nod to those in the know.
Many of the reviews I read before deciding on a 197 were very enthusiastic, but a few comparisons with turbocharged rivals (e.g. Cooper S Mk2) highlighted a "lack" of torque. What you read is factually accurate; I could almost describe my 197 as an S2000 engine in a Clio. But even after owning a fairly muscular turbo diesel before the 197, the 197 feels torquey - even at low revs. Don't be mislead about this: it won't slay all comers at 2,000rpm, but it's potent even for an NA engine of its size in average driving due to the constant VVT (not just over certain revs). Quite noticeably more torquey than the 172 / 182 incarnations of this engine in my view.
Clearly, the real excitement begins at 5,000rpm though. It's true that the 6 gear ratios are short - once you're up into the rev range, a change up will always have you in the power zone again. My 197 has the shorter 5th / 6th gear ratios that have been lengthened on very recent 197s, but then 3,600rpm at 70mph is about the same as you get in a Mk1 Civic Type-R. In truth, it's quite hard to cruise at legal leptons: the race-car-like buzz and noise urge you on. It's also quite fun to drive around primed for action at high revs, which is surely the only way to deal with these modern turdo-diesel upstarts!
Straight-line speed feels good... broadly the same as any of the Clios from 16V through to 182. I think people often overestimate the difference a second here or there makes - and underestimate the variability in power output from these RenaultSport engines. If you need to know: I think a 197 is as quick off the mark as any and is easier to keep on the boil. Braking is outstanding, courtesy of some tasty Brembos up front and a good characteristic carried over from previous models.
The handling is also excellent - really capturing some of the spirit of the Williams in its ability to soak up bumps, but grip with the best of them. I don't think I've ever been in a better handling road car than a 197. From a practicality point of view, the long travel pays off as you cruise over speed bumps that many hot hatches weep at. Fuel economy of 33mpg is as quoted, unlike many cars in recent memory that need very gentle coaxing to get anywhere near the manufacturer's figures.
I'm a little more interested in practical items these days. Parking is excellent (although you need to watch the width of the car) and the interior is significantly better build and insulated than before. For most people, this will do as an only car. I'm a little disappointed at the basic spec though: a weedy stereo, no xenons and other goodies that will no doubt become standard over time. Still, this is a car for driving is it not?
I don't drive very often and we only need one car nowadays. It's happy to be an easy and comfortable drive around town and on longer journeys, but it's also delighted to be totally thrashed.
Therein lies the appeal of a 197: a good balance of most things, but pretty extreme when you want it to be.
Nice review there, a little one sided 
but an excellent review!
I'm seriously considering one of these as my next car.
but an excellent review!I'm seriously considering one of these as my next car.
is the 197 the very new one, if so it looks gawjus. lol
i like the one in the perlescent yellow colour, i think that the F1 edition.
yes thats the one i'd have, it's called liquid gold and has the black multispokes (speedline turinis if the same as the 182 trophy and 172 cup) and the nice seats and other extras.
F1 all the way
lol yes please i see a megane in that liquid gold colour all the time near my house, it is so lush.
lol is there a renault sport mag? :yum:
Last edited:
Dunno..but I have to agree Renault sure do make some cracking hot hatches...Clio R27 for me!
lol the clio V6 is by far the best, love the huge side pods, they could suck in a cat. lol
stumac1985
New member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2007
- Messages
- 215
- Points
- 36
Check this beast out then!
A full 90 horse power, babe magnet....Nuff said!
A full 90 horse power, babe magnet....Nuff said!
Last edited:
Mmmm, French cars are noted for emerging from the shallow end of the gene pool when it comes to looks! Reliability of engines extremely poor too according to the big surveys.
So....it's be safe and go German or 'Viva Italia' all the way. I'm wondering whether Fabio Capello could have a word with Fiat customer services when/if he takes on 'mission impossible'!
So....it's be safe and go German or 'Viva Italia' all the way. I'm wondering whether Fabio Capello could have a word with Fiat customer services when/if he takes on 'mission impossible'!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2004
- Messages
- 25,218
- Points
- 3,672
Wow a statement you have made that I agree with
. Knew someone in my last job who bought a new laguna 2 years back and the cambelt snapped not once but twice in 18months and got a new engine both times but still!........ :nerner:stumac1985
New member
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2007
- Messages
- 215
- Points
- 36
10 year old french car - No parts failed that are not considered consumables.
2 Year old Italian Car - Has had new Body Computer and is going in for new instrument panel and new gear box.
Something tells me that the Itallians are worse...
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2004
- Messages
- 25,218
- Points
- 3,672
Its a matter of perspective IMO. Some people get sheds its pot luck no matter how much you spend or what marque you buy it from. Imagine how pissed you would be if you just spent £80k on a top spec 7 series BMW only for it to not work which does happen (quite alot too).
Last edited:
lol french are crap, take the saxo/106 for example, you only have to blow on it and the panels fall off, a few mates of mine have them and they are shocking, loads of problems.
