Should I
- Thread starter Dabbot
- Start date
Help Support Twingo Forum:
Dazza1
Well-known member
Don't do it I was gonna when I had my twingo gt but service costs put me off
manofhow
Well-known member
no dont, twingo is so much more fun
and as daz said the service costs are nuts, if need anythng needs to be done, the engine normally has to come out as there is no room to move
and as daz said the service costs are nuts, if need anythng needs to be done, the engine normally has to come out as there is no room to move
Dazza1
Well-known member
Manofhow is right jobs ain't simple on it
dempsej
Well-known member
Get both. 
What year Clio?
What year Clio?
Few variables to consider though other than how the car drives.
Yes the 182 will be slightly higher on tax/insurance but fuel economy on them isn't hugely different than a 133. Also if you have outstanding finance or more money tied up in a 133 (with them being most expensive at the moment) then a 182 may actually work out to be cheaper.
In terms of driving, the 182 is quicker in a straight line and I'd say in most road conditions, the handling is on a par with a 133 with Cup chassis. The difference though is that the 133 feels less fidgety and gives you more confidence in the corners. The 182 is by no means a poor handling car.
The looks are subjective, yes the 133 looks modern and more fresh but the Clio isn't a bad looking car. The exterior bits and pieces on an RS Clio make it a subtle but beefier looking version. I do prefer the looks of the 133 side by side with 182 but I wouldn't be embarassed being in one, if anything they've still got that little something that makes them specisl.
Interior wise, the 133 feels more modern. I'd say the interior on the 182 feels the most dated aspect of the car. That said though, as standard a 182 will out do the Twingo in terms of interior features. Only the Gordini can come close to the toys in a Clio 182 as standard.
That's my thoughts on the subject anyway so I hope that helps. I've owned a Clio 172 'full fat' and driven a Clio 182 Cup very regularly a few years back, now I've got the Gordini 133 non-Cup and the Mrs has a 133 'full fat' with the Cup chassis. Fair bit of driving of both so hopefully a decent comparison for you.
Yes the 182 will be slightly higher on tax/insurance but fuel economy on them isn't hugely different than a 133. Also if you have outstanding finance or more money tied up in a 133 (with them being most expensive at the moment) then a 182 may actually work out to be cheaper.
In terms of driving, the 182 is quicker in a straight line and I'd say in most road conditions, the handling is on a par with a 133 with Cup chassis. The difference though is that the 133 feels less fidgety and gives you more confidence in the corners. The 182 is by no means a poor handling car.
The looks are subjective, yes the 133 looks modern and more fresh but the Clio isn't a bad looking car. The exterior bits and pieces on an RS Clio make it a subtle but beefier looking version. I do prefer the looks of the 133 side by side with 182 but I wouldn't be embarassed being in one, if anything they've still got that little something that makes them specisl.
Interior wise, the 133 feels more modern. I'd say the interior on the 182 feels the most dated aspect of the car. That said though, as standard a 182 will out do the Twingo in terms of interior features. Only the Gordini can come close to the toys in a Clio 182 as standard.
That's my thoughts on the subject anyway so I hope that helps. I've owned a Clio 172 'full fat' and driven a Clio 182 Cup very regularly a few years back, now I've got the Gordini 133 non-Cup and the Mrs has a 133 'full fat' with the Cup chassis. Fair bit of driving of both so hopefully a decent comparison for you.
manofhow
Well-known member
alex, how comes the mrs got the cup
She wanted it all black and white with the 17" rims. lol Purely cosmetic.
To be honest, we've both agreed we prefer the drive from my Gordini. I've always said, having driven and kinda owned both, my main reason for liking the Cup pack is the 17" rims. For me the Gordini was perfect for road driving, supple but firm chassis but with the wheels. (which I, ahem changed anyway haha)
To be honest, we've both agreed we prefer the drive from my Gordini. I've always said, having driven and kinda owned both, my main reason for liking the Cup pack is the 17" rims. For me the Gordini was perfect for road driving, supple but firm chassis but with the wheels. (which I, ahem changed anyway haha)
JimmyD1982
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 29, 2012
- Messages
- 26
- Reaction score
- 0
I had a 182 til a year ago - great car but expensive to run, service, insure etc. Undoubtedly quicker than the 133 and better built imo but arguably not as fun to drive. Not all that reliable either and, given the last ones were made in 2005, you'd be taking a bit of a risk. Pros and cons for both but I'd stick with the Twingo, I'm really glad I got mine. If you're gonna trade, depending on budget, I'd go with a 197/200.
Mr slippyfist
Active member
- Joined
- Jan 4, 2012
- Messages
- 43
- Reaction score
- 0
I had a brand new black gold 182 back in 2005 ff with cup pack & yes it was quicker than the 133 I have now.. & I would say the build quality on the twingo is better but only just.. There is only 1 182 I would ever consider to buy over the twingo & that's the 182 trophy .. If I were you I would wait till the 197s get cheaper .. So much better than the 182.. ( I had a brand new one of them as well ff + cup pack )