'Coupe' comparison article

Thought I would share this! Sorry if I have shared before.
Quite an interesting read from when we where running all three at the same time in 2000.

Check out the difference in laptimes at the bottom of the article.

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t...emake_0001.jpg

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t...emake_0002.jpg

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t...emake_0003.jpg

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t...emake_0004.jpg

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t...emake_0005.jpg

http://i162.photobucket.com/albums/t...emake_0006.jpg

Great article :)

Wow there's a big difference between the 172 and the other two. How many seconds per lap are attributable purely to the sequential shifter?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Trevhib

Wow there's a big difference between the 172 and the other two. How many seconds per lap are attributable purely to the sequential shifter?

---

i'd say at least 10 ;) :laugh:

That's really interesting. I wouldn't have thought the 172 would have been THAT much quicker.

Sequential gearbox with different ratios to the road car will much improve lap times i should imagine.

It's not just the sequential box tho is it? There is twenty yeas worth of chassis and engine development there.

That may be true, but if the five had the same power as the 172 With LSD a decent set of either leda of koni's and I bet the time difference would be less;)

A great comparison of hot hatch's over the last 20 years tho!

Sam is that 16v clio OZZY's car now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by andybond

It's not just the sequential box tho is it? There is twenty yeas worth of chassis and engine development there.

---

No, but I was interested to know the difference it made as the article picked up on it and knowing would help to quantify how much difference those other things account for, which would then make for a fairer comparison.

Also, the 16v and the GTT have very similar times and the chassis development from the 16v to the 172 is nowhere near 20 years (more like 5). So either they made big strides in that short time (possible), or the differences are to be found elsewhere (which brings the gearbox back to the fore).

Hey Matt,
Yeah, that is Ozzy's now!

Yeah, its quite interesting. Wheel size/width and tyre compounds could make a difference. But the 16v and 172 couldn't be that different.

The Clio 16v pitches and dives quite alot on Coupe dampers. As mentioned above, put some Leda's on there and there could be a couple of seconds.

the 172 has a diff too.

Just realised that GT turbo is still here. It only did 2 or 3 races with the new shell.
I think Paul Lomax wants it shipped out to spain at some point.

That's a good read thanks :agree:,

the 172 seems quick in comaprison to the other two like already mentioned. However how many of these cars are actually standard on the roads these days...

I think there would be nothing in it on a "B road" and I'm sure the 5 would win hands down, it's a different kind of person that drives a 5 ;) and I'm also just a little bias :D if you've noticed...

Oooh. A B-road race comparison with standard cars, that would level it out a bit!