Pistonheads - 133 vs 182 review
- Thread starter weebob
- Start date
Help Support Twingo Forum:
singlespeed
Well-known member
prety well balanced review.
I'm tempted to try 182 cup wishbones for size. If they fit onto the subframe which i think they will, I'm wondering how they would affect the castor angle, wheelbase and track. Then, theres trophy dampers
I'm tempted to try 182 cup wishbones for size. If they fit onto the subframe which i think they will, I'm wondering how they would affect the castor angle, wheelbase and track. Then, theres trophy dampers
JMR
Well-known member
I have a 182 Cup and RS133 Twingo Gordini.
The engine note and enthusiasm of the Twingo is great, better than the 182, but when you really want to shift, the Clio doesnt half rocket past 5k rpm.
On the same run to work, day to day on 50mph+ reasonably constant speed A roads I get the same economy whichever car I take.
Usually a touch over 40mpg. Thats decent in a Clio!
Town driving means the Clio can drop down to 25-26mpg the following week.
The engine note and enthusiasm of the Twingo is great, better than the 182, but when you really want to shift, the Clio doesnt half rocket past 5k rpm.
On the same run to work, day to day on 50mph+ reasonably constant speed A roads I get the same economy whichever car I take.
Usually a touch over 40mpg. Thats decent in a Clio!
Town driving means the Clio can drop down to 25-26mpg the following week.
KamRS
Well-known member
Kind ofs urprised by the choice of that specific Clio. A 182 Cup or maybe even a plain 182 might be a better comparison, I think? Unless it's a "what to get for ~5k" writeup..
It's a good bit of reading although I'm not sure I agree with all of it, well mainly where it says,
"similar height, similar roof-lines, similar stance, similar-looking bonnets, windscreens, B-pillars..."
Now I have one of each and park my 172 right alongside my other half's 133. The 172 is noticeably lower, in terms of how you get into the car and looking at the roofline side by side, a good few inches different. The 133 is taller in stance on it's bigger wheels the 172 looks more low slung and in turn looks longer, even if it's not.
I get the impression they mistake the fact that it is a Renault with the fact that the Twingo is based on the Clio MKII and that by default it will have similarities. In the same sense I can climb into a Clio 197/200 and see similarities with my Megane.
I guess I just mean that as much as they share the same platform and are equally fun for different reasons, they're not as similar in my opinion as they let on in that article.
"similar height, similar roof-lines, similar stance, similar-looking bonnets, windscreens, B-pillars..."
Now I have one of each and park my 172 right alongside my other half's 133. The 172 is noticeably lower, in terms of how you get into the car and looking at the roofline side by side, a good few inches different. The 133 is taller in stance on it's bigger wheels the 172 looks more low slung and in turn looks longer, even if it's not.
I get the impression they mistake the fact that it is a Renault with the fact that the Twingo is based on the Clio MKII and that by default it will have similarities. In the same sense I can climb into a Clio 197/200 and see similarities with my Megane.
I guess I just mean that as much as they share the same platform and are equally fun for different reasons, they're not as similar in my opinion as they let on in that article.