id go 160 if you can afford the insurance tbh.

 

how long do you plan to keep it?

 

Hopefully for a long time.

 

clio 172.... lol. Just thought i would throw that out there.

 

Just to make sure he buys a ZR I guess :dddc:

 

Then get the 160.

If it was only for a year or two then save the money.

 

172 faster and according to the what car reliability index the clio is more reliable. The zr is better looking though and it isnt french.

 

looks wise, the zr shats all over the clio tbh.

 

Just playing devils advocate, ignore me, i will skuttle off

 

My mate has one, and wow the quality is bad, he grabbed hold of the centre console the other day, to show me, it came away from the car, and the platic was flexing to hell, showed me about 10 other nasty things, though it does move well, its also had a lot of mechanical problems.

 

There not built well, but then they are cheap compared with the civic type r, of similar age n spec.

 

Looks like I'm gonna go with the 160 then. I think this is what I would have done anyway but I felt stupid paying all the extra money for the same sized engine but I think it'll be worth it.
Does anybody know the 0-60 times for both?

 

I'm planning on selling my mk1 105 and buying either a mk2 120 or a mk2 160. Obviously I would prefer the 160 but my insurance is over 600 quid more for the 160.
I'm willing to pay the higher insurance for the 160 but I was wondering if you guys think it is worth paying that much more or should I just go for the 120? Is the extra performance worth the cash?

Cheers
Ryan

id go 120. i love my 120.
you could save plenty with that 600quid, new pressie for you&car at the end of each month, dunno how much fuel cost in uk but you could probably fuel your car each month for 600quid.

 

Theres a few ZR turbo conversions knocking about on the ZR forum, just to wet your appetite a little for around £2000 - £2500

 

I'd love a turbo but my insurance is too high as it is atm. Maybe in a few years as I think my insurance company would see a 19 year old with a turbo conversion quite a high risk lol.

Anyone know the 0-60 times for the 120 and 160? And also a turbo if u know it just to see how it compares.

 

Show us one that can look nice then

And does it need towing that often then even label it for Mr AA man :lol:

Why are you lot discussing French tat anyway? :dddc:

 

The cheek! Its running ITB's as well if that makes it any better? :lol:


//EDIT - Back on topic.... HGF?

 

what were we talking about? something about a fashion show? erm.... i can't remember!!!!!


say no to french tat!

 

Plus points for each

Clio renaultsports-

Faster
Better handling
racing pedigree
Stats say more reliable

Zr-

Better looking
Feels better built
British
Isnt french

 

On the other hand it doesn't take much to negate much of that. Little bit of tuning and fettling.

Mates 172 can't keep up with my Coupe at Snetterton on either straight line speed or handling. Its not a driver thing either as I can't catch him when he drives mine.

But hey, I don't want to get into a debate over which is better. Each appeals to people in different ways. The French like the Clio, everyone else thinks its tat

 

Having a 160 myself i would have to say get the 160 mate

what extra you spend on insurance you will be paying for the extra smile on your face

 

Defo get the 160, cracking car. Although i would rather get the diesel (Like i did) and mod it and be as fast if not faster than the 160, save on fuel costs & insurance aswell as gain a huge amount of torque!!

 

I'd prefer a 160 over the clio.

That said i'd have a 105 over it too.

 

Rang my insurance company today and turns out they won't actually insure me on the 160 anyway so looks like I'm gonna have to settle for the 120. Is there a huge amount of differnce between that and the 105 I've got atm cos I know it's only 15 bhp differnce. I suppose there would be alot more tourqe meaning much better acceleration instead of top speed which I'm not that bothered anyway.

Cheers
Ryan

 

not exact but 160 is 7.5 and 120 9.0 so not much different to your 105. defo go for the 160, dont crash and your insurance will get cheap next year. go on a comparisson site and see wat you get....

 

Its not just the speed/acceleration - the driveability of the 120 is so much better. Usually comes with more goodies spec wise as well. Make sure you shop around and get all of the options if you can!

 

You should at least try out the diesel... just a thought. But as said the 120 will have alot more guts than the 105 going up hills and accelerating in gear. Best way is to go and have a test drive mate, car dealers are having a really bad time atm so push em for a good deal.

 

Personally prefer the clio sports due to the extra performance and handling-not that it matters what i think about the clio (I cant argue either are totally reliable or well built). But i would say go for the 160 over the 120 as IMO it is the only zr which warrants the aggressive styling and attention it attracts.
There are plenty of cars in the same insurance/price category as the zr and clio but they all have their plus and minus points, if the OP is set on a zr i cant see anything wrong with that, decent cars.

Cheers, James