Discussion in 'Motoring' started by mcfarfs, Oct 21, 2005.
A 98 S Reg Ford Fiesta Zetec 1.25....or an 04 Renault Clio 1.2?????
Fiesta Mk4 1.25 zetec 0-60: 11.9 seconds, top speed 105mph.
Clio 1.2 16v 0-60: 13 seconds, top speed 106mph.
I think the question could be rephrased as which is the least slow...
Thats what I meant .
That is what I wanted to hear, I was discussing this with a friend who has the Clio..whether my Fiesta would be faster off the mark. Which it is! Hooray!
I think that the quality of your gear changes will make the biggest difference in this instance.
I think how much you had to eat for breakfast will make the biggest difference!
Crikey ,in my day we argued which was faster ,a Grifter or a chopper.
The Dibble in the car behind you will be faster.
both would be around the same........until the roadsweeper overtook you! also stats on paper mean bugger all, if youve got 100,000 miles on the clock and your mates got low mileage then they'd probably have more power due to a newer engine, also if you had anything more than a chocolate bar adding weight then this to would slow it down etc. i know all about it, ive got a 1.6 xsara!
Don't they still have Top Trumps to resolve arguements like this these days?
P.S. mcfarfs, I used to have a Puma, which was based on the mk4 Fiesta chassis but had a 1.7l zetec engine, and it was tremendous fun to drive, even without huge performance.
Quite right...she is a more experienced driver (as I'm still learning!) so I guess she would have better gear changes if it ever came to it. Not that it would .
Having said that, she is a woman driver....
Well her Clio has a much lower mileage. Damn.
Ah thats what the game is for!
Just gotta wait till I can drive now!
Herein lies the rub. Actually making a car (FWD in particular) achieve those times is next to impossible and certainly something you wouldn't try in your own car. You have to dial in about 6000 revs, use the clutch like an on/off switch when leaving the line and not use it at all when going from first to second. In gear accelaration times are a far more useful guide to how fast something is IMO.
tons of fun. I agree with you that it is difficult to achieve some of the 0-60 times, I own a motorbike (0-60 3.2 secs (with me on it its more like 5!)) but for something that slow you could achieve those sorts of times without too much bother.
I had my 92 Celica hooked up to a computer system. It was supposed to do 0-60 in 7.9 seconds but was doing it in a fantastic 9.5! thanks to 100 000 miles a wrecked clutch, gearbox and bad driver!
Personally i thinking getting out and walking would be faster...
Oh and i've got a 95 Celica GT4.. 240 bhp (at the moment)
Although the the little voices in my head have some plans for the power of this beast!!
Yeh yeh alright, its my first car, you think I could get insurance on anything much bigger??!
My first car is faster and bigger than yours and I probably pay less insurance.
Sorry, forget to mention, it is my first car and I'm 17
great wee car for a first car! dont get annoyed by their abuse! my first car was a metro that cost me £500. 0-60 3000 years
Jeez, it took me long enough to find those figures, and now you want "in gear" acceleration times...
Ah, my first car was a metro, too. Stupid bl**dy metric tyres cost a fortune! But, I did manage to keep up with a Lambo Diablo going down the A1 (basically because he didn't go above 90mph).
I can't speak for the Clio but I have a 00 Fiesta 1.25 ghia
Whilst it's the slowest car i've had for a while (last one was an Audi S2 ) it's surprisingly nippy for a 1.25 engine.
Have to rev it quite hard to get a move on and it sounds like somebody is strangling a cat at high revs
Not sure what the 0-60 times are but i stuck with a Focus 1.8TD up to 3rd gear one time
I had the Fiesta Zetec Mk 4 (1.4 16v) as my 1st car for 60k miles from new and it was suprisingly nippy and agile for the performance figures, was quite fun to drive aswell! the 1.25 gets about 90% of the performance of the 1.4 aswell. It needs to be revved though but as a 1st car there's plenty worse you can get...
I'm another 1.25 Fiesta driver- prior to that I had a Nissan 200SX so I too have experienced a fair drop in performance. If I had been told three years ago that I'd be driving 400 motorway miles a week in a Fiesta I think I would have got myself deliberately banned but actually my repect for the thing continues to grow. It cruises entirely happily at 80mph and doesn't cost a massive amount to run. The engine is effectively torque free but revs well and it doesn't feel dangerously slow. It handles suprisingly well to boot.
My missus first car that I just bought her
Insurance only 200 quid although we both think it's a standard 1.3 Fiesta GL
Thats a smart motor!
If you have an accident, it won't take an insurance assessor very long at all to work out that it's modified. And if that happens, the insurance company will declare your insurance void.
That will also leave you open to prosecution. In fact, if the police stop you and give you a producer, there's every chance you'll be nicked anyway for having invalid insurance.
Even worse, if you cause an accident, your insurance company may not pay out the person that you've hit. That would lead to you being sued.
It really is important that you declare any modifications to your insurance company! Particularly now that you've posted in this thread, with details of the car in question, on a public forum!!
It depends what's been done to it... it'd be very difficult for an assessor to find out about any internal engine mods... such as a long stroke crank, oversized pistons or any porting or polishing work.
Less hard to spot lowered suspension, alloy wheels, aftermarket carburettors and strut braces, though...
Oops, just seen it, the carb is standard afaik, the strut brace largely pointless, the alloys factory option on the GL, and the suspension isn't actually lowered, just uprated I think?? But yeah, I can see your point, my other car has all the mods declared, didn't really think about this one.
Separate names with a comma.