PDA

View Full Version : 172 Vs Williams



Jamie.
11-10-2008, 13:32
The first thing I noticed about swapping from the Williams to the 172 was the seating position. In the 172 I really do feel they got this all wrong, you sit very high which gives the feel you could be behind the wheel of Transit rather than a modern hot hatch! The steering wheel also feels as if it has come from an old fashion steam boat as its roughly 30metres in diameter – both of these factors really detract from the overall initial impression of the car which is a big shame. Whereas in the Williams you sit a lot lower and more purposefully, you also have a much more modest steering wheel which allows you to manipulate the car easier.

The actual seats however I have no complaints about… Coming from the Williams interior to the 172 is a pleasant experience, you get half leather alacantra seats nicely stitched with Renault Sport and the instrument cluster is much more modern take, not to mention the “toys” which are fun to mess about with.

However, apart from these stitched seats what else lets me know I am in a hot hatch? Well, nothing. I have a small badge on the steering wheel which says Renault Sport but aside from that there is bugger all to say – “You are in a sporty car”. Ok, so my point here can be irrelevant as there does become a point or line you draw and say – “I want it to let me know I am in a hot hatch but not be chavvy”. This is a line Ford crossed when designing the old Focus RS and to some degree you may feel the Williams interior has crossed to but I on the other hand really appreciate this extra effort.

For example in the Williams not only do I have blue seat belts, blue dials, blue gear knob, differentiated standard steering wheel, embossed seats I also get three wonderful dials which say: Oil temperature, oil pressure and cold oil level on ignition. Unlike the Ford though, it is done in a much more tasteful way with dark navy blue the colour of choice which really isn’t as much in your face as the text describes.

These extra changes in the Williams go some way to suggest what the car is all about, not only do these dials look good but are of great importance and let you know when its ‘good to go’ and ok to hammer it. This is something which I really doubt many owners realise – just how long it takes for an engine to fully warm up although I do accept more modern engines will stand up to abuse a little more and maybe these instruments have lost a little bit of their importance they are great to look at and help in deciding how healthy an engine is.

The power and speed of the cars is not really something I want to get too bogged down in as this really does get talked about to destruction. The cars I would say are very similar in performance with the 172, I feel certainly pulling better at higher speeds however, less than 70 or 80mph there is nothing in it.

The more important factor here is the actual delivery of this power. The 172 really needs to be thrashed and above that magic five thousand rev’s whereas the Williams can really pull well from 3k. This point can easily be confirmed when pootling along a country road at 20-30mph in second gear… Push it and there is that little delay until you get up the rev’s when ‘you’re off’. This point is further exaggerated by the Williams’ shorter gear ratio’s and lower red line so the gear times are very short but this does mean you never have to wait for power and don’t have to really thrash it to get somewhere quick. I suppose this criticism or fact is best interpreted by the reader and how they prefer to drive – coming from the Williams I much prefer the way it pull’s in 2nd and 3rd but others might like longer gear times in time I may sway either way.

The handling of the cars is also fairly different, the Williams I would say is a lot more twitchy on the limit and easy to know when you get to that limit. The 172 is a bit more ‘lazy’ and you have to work on it to push it as you never are really sure where that is so stay within its boundaries a little more. To be honest, I rarely really push my cars hard on the road for fear of crashing or losing control which is why I am always at the back of the pack on a run… It is fair to say that both are fun to drive but all magazines and members who I have spoken to sum it up in very few words – The Williams is just a better driver’s car, which is spot on.

However this is where the 172 scores massively and the Williams falls back. The 172 really is a great car to be in, its very nice to drive and not at all a chore and for all its greatness and being a drivers car the Williams by this very nature is very, very raw. I drive between 30 and 40 miles a day generally and this is why I have ended up with a 172. The Williams would often begin to grate and in all fairness it is 13 years old but doing those kind of mileages and driving made it difficult to enjoy it. The 172 offers 75% of the fun factor with 10% of the hassle of the Williams and when making a balanced decision this made the 172 a winner for me. I also think it only fair to mention the 172’s unbelievable petrol consumption too. Where the Williams can achieve similar mpg’s this is due to driving like miss daisy but the 172 seems to get excellent returns from a mix of pushing it and driving sensibly. When you cane the Williams it really does use petrol which when doing 40 miles a day again makes you think twice.

So, which would I own? Which do I think is best? I think it’s fairly obvious from my write up. If you want a great car to have a thrash about with on the weekend it has to be the Williams. If you are doing considerable mileage and need just one car it has to be the 172. If you have a few thousand to spend and not sure what to do with it – Buy a 1.2 for the week and have the Williams there for the weekend!

Jamie.
11-10-2008, 13:42
This was something I thought may help those of you wanting to buy something newer and thinking of a 172.

Rob72
11-10-2008, 14:12
:goodposting:

katbloke
11-10-2008, 14:48
A very good comparable post, thanks Jamie. The original owner of my williams went to a 172 and to this day still says the williams was a btter performing and handling car

MatrixGuy
11-10-2008, 15:01
Great post mate!

I use my willy as an everyday car but to be honest if i had the choice (or funds) i wouldn't!

Also, the Williams looks soooo much better than the 172!

Jamie.
11-10-2008, 15:04
Yeh, you are right about the looks of the Williams - looks better than any other Clio.

1995clio16v
11-10-2008, 15:10
This was something I thought may help those of you wanting to buy something newer and thinking of a 17poo.

Great post mate.

Is that the mark I or II you've bought??

8)

Jamie.
11-10-2008, 15:18
I have just bought a 2003, 172.

Didn't go mark 1 172 as their dash looks, well, 'interesting' to say the least.

robi1000
11-10-2008, 18:34
Very good comparison! I always like to hear it from someone who actually had both cars. Very good post!

1995clio16v
11-10-2008, 19:21
I have just bought a 2003, 17poo.

Didn't go mark 1 17poo as their dash looks, well, 'interesting' to say the least.

You didnt buy one cause of the dash!?

Am I barking up the wrong tree here!?

Jamie.
11-10-2008, 19:26
I have just bought a 2003, 17poo.

Didn't go mark 1 17poo as their dash looks, well, 'interesting' to say the least.

You didnt buy one cause of the dash!?

Am I barking up the wrong tree here!?

I didn't buy one for a few reasons.

The dash was one as they do not look good to me. The other is the bug eye front, I also wanted something 'quite new'.

Yanoo_
11-10-2008, 19:50
Very good post mate, thanks Jamie.

(I have a Williams for weekend and a Clio Mk1 1.2 for the week :wink: )

J o n
12-10-2008, 14:22
If you spend an absolute fortune you can make a 172 as good a drivers car :lol:

Jamie.
12-10-2008, 14:26
I intend to just drive the 17.2 for a year tbh. For what I paid I should be able to sell it in a years time for the same amount. May lose a few hundred at most but for the ease of driving of I don't mind that.

J o n
12-10-2008, 14:33
I prefer my 172 over my Williams now tbh. More fun, quicker, but the main thing is it's much much more reliable, my Williams was off the road constantly, but it's old and was used daily :(

Jamie.
12-10-2008, 14:40
At the moment I really don't like how much you really have to thrash it to make it go quick.

Sometimes it can be really inconvienient when you are in 2nd at 20mph and have to wait till you get to 35 before it takes off. In the Williams at 30mph you are already really high up in the rev's so there is no lagg.

The gear times also feel so long. No doubt I will get used to this and adapt my driving style but right now that feels slow. It isn't slow though, you watch the speedo move and its going pretty damn quick. But going from a car which has lower gear ratios and lower red line to one with the contary has made a huge impression. I would say that the 172 at speed is quicker for sure though. Above 70 and it would pull away a bit I'd say.

It's funny on Clio Sport everyone bangs on about how shit a CTR is do to the fact you have to rev it..... Christ give them a Williams and they will say the same about a 172 or 182.

Jamie.
12-10-2008, 14:41
Haha, C.T.R = CTR

J o n
12-10-2008, 15:28
yeah totally agree with the low end power, mine wasn't too clever on standard inlet, just felt gutless to about 5k+

My Williams was quicker to any speed with cams and breathing mods vs omex + breathing mods on the 172 at the time too. Does my little bridge test 3mph quicker into tripple figures.

gearing is also massive aye lol. Ph1 is even taller than yours too!

Jamie.
12-10-2008, 15:46
I have a similar method of speed testing back home in North Wales, in the Williams along a fairly large straight on a very steep climb I could get 90mph in the Williams. It will be good to see waht the 172 can do.

richy
12-10-2008, 16:20
i agree about the power delivery of the new renaultsports, my 1 8 2 you have to wind it up to over 4k before it does anything and the old 1 7 2 was worse!

i love how my hybrid just picks up from anywere instantly almost, no waiting about,

but i do find with my 1 8 2 that once you are up above 4-5k and are thrashing along it never drops out of the power, its just that intial waiting for it to go!

Jamie.
12-10-2008, 16:25
i agree about the power delivery of the new renaultsports, my 1 8 2 you have to wind it up to over 4k before it does anything and the old 1 7 2 was worse!

i love how my hybrid just picks up from anywere instantly almost, no waiting about,

but i do find with my 1 8 2 that once you are up above 4-5k and are thrashing along it never drops out of the power, its just that intial waiting for it to go!

Yeh mate. Never driven a 18.2 myself so cannot compare, although I have been a passenger in one but I don't remember that. Is there alot of difference then? I didn't think there was - or do you mean old 17.2 ph1 not ph2?

richy
12-10-2008, 16:34
im comparing it against the silver 53plate 1 7 2 i was using a few year ago, u had to be over 5k before it went and even then it didnt seem to go that well, compared to my current 1 8 2 that picks up about 4k and really kicks well at 5k, not a massive difference as you still have to wait but just seems more lively then the 1 7 2 did.

Jamie.
12-10-2008, 16:36
Sounds very similar as mine needs to be @ 5k where the VVT kicks in. Although I do think it goes well when it gets there.

J o n
13-10-2008, 09:15
Sounds very similar as mine needs to be @ 5k where the VVT kicks in. Although I do think it goes well when it gets there.

VVT kicks in at £2500rpm ;) It's a static advance, 16 degree's iirc

Ellie
15-10-2008, 18:55
I much prefer driving the williams over the 172 :D

eternalife
15-10-2008, 19:26
Having owned both...simplest way to describe it is...

Williams = Sports Hatch
172 = Grand Touring Hatch (lol)

Dash in 172 Ph1 has far too many curvy bits - definitely looks dated.

Ph1's look awesome...
http://i438.photobucket.com/albums/qq110/sivyer33/BILD0320.jpg

A guy from RSC (Mike S) car above...it is for sale too.

kneesparks
15-10-2008, 19:47
Williams is my dayly car, must say the fuel does go down quite quickly tho :shock: But it just brings back memorys of around 6years bk when i 1st had one so still in loving the drive, my wk end car is my skyline but i cant afford the fuel on that as that is half the clio :roll:
My m8 had a 17poo but that was around 200bhp Zorst filter and chip and i was well impressed how well that went, didnt notice the low end power as i was just ragging it :twisted:

kneesparks
15-10-2008, 19:50
^^^^ Those wheels really look nice on that good choice bud :) 8)

mozzarooni
15-10-2008, 19:50
Eternal life do you have a link to the for sale thread mate?? :D

eternalife
15-10-2008, 20:46
Eternal life do you have a link to the for sale thread mate?? :D

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?t=356632&highlight=clio+2.0+16v+X+reg

http://212.241.214.117/forum/index.php?s=f644d4380f0954ec3007d0944f23a414&showtopic=20523

mozzarooni
15-10-2008, 20:50
Eternal life do you have a link to the for sale thread mate?? :D

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?t=356632&highlight=clio+2.0+16v+X+reg

http://212.241.214.117/forum/index.php?s=f644d4380f0954ec3007d0944f23a414&showtopic=20523

Thanking you kindly mate!! 8)

eternalife
15-10-2008, 22:05
Eternal life do you have a link to the for sale thread mate?? :D

http://www.cliosport.net/forum/showthread.php?t=356632&highlight=clio+2.0+16v+X+reg

http://212.241.214.117/forum/index.php?s=f644d4380f0954ec3007d0944f23a414&showtopic=20523

Thanking you kindly mate!! 8)

No probs 8)

PC-PLOD
17-10-2008, 15:45
Great post i,ve got a willy and a 172 the willy is better low down all the power/torque below 4500rpm makes for rapid progress thro the box 172 simular but as you say you have to rev it, all said and done i prefer the willy much better grip on the right rubber , you feel much more confident in it .the 172 is twichy and has not got the level of grip as the willy might have the edge in top speed but a well driven willy will almost every time be better

J o n
17-10-2008, 16:43
yeah Williams is just a better car no matter what the 172 can or think it can do better as standard. I've owned both also, Williams wins... my word is law!

Jamie.
05-11-2008, 14:15
Pretty bored of the 172 now. I think it was a bit of a mistake. :?

Think I will flog the 172 after christmas, get a 2nd cheap car and get some mod's done to the Williams.

Or maybe sell mine and get a 1 to keep?

J o n
05-11-2008, 15:45
Get rid of the 172 and get some ITB's on the Williams

FlamingMonkey
05-11-2008, 17:53
Pretty bored of the 172 now. I think it was a bit of a mistake. :?

Think I will flog the 172 after christmas, get a 2nd cheap car and get some mod's done to the Williams.

Or maybe sell mine and get a 1 to keep?

exactly what I said, boring to drive in comparison!

Daz.
25-01-2009, 21:43
I test drove a 182 for the hell of it today, seen as we're going to one car I thought I'd see what they're like....

I felt so so bland driving it, I honestly thought I was in a 1.6 or something - I also noticed the build quality isn't very good - even in a 34k car it was damaged this and worn that - its the same with others I've seen!

Jamie.
25-01-2009, 21:51
Funny to see this bumped up.

As time goes by I do enjoy the 172 more and more. The ease of drive is welcoming.

Build quality is fine on mine, no rattles or anything so quite suprised by what you have found Daz.

Daz.
25-01-2009, 22:07
All the steering wheels have been falling to bits - read on other forums thats a common issue on them, cracking leather on the bolsters was common too..

Don't get me wrong they're nice cars to be in and look at but I didn't feel I was sitting in something that was value for money - maybe its too soft for me or I hadn't adjusted, having just had an awesome drive in the willy didn't help either I guess!

Jamie.
25-01-2009, 22:10
Yeh you are dead right in alot of ways mate. The steering wheels are shit mine isnt as bad as some but never new about the bolsters - mine look fine.

For driving the williams is far better but I suppose it depends on if its for commuting or not which is in the end what its for with me.

172 is just a fast 1.2 in alot of ways.

antony
27-01-2009, 14:22
172 is just a fast 1.2 in alot of ways.
hahahahaha
..........well unless you get the CUP
:twisted:

2 live
28-01-2009, 18:29
then its a poverty spec quick 1.2

J o n
28-01-2009, 18:41
172 may not be quicker, but it will certainly win an endurance race :lol:

Matty86
28-01-2009, 20:41
what about a 172 in a mk1? :P

2 live
28-01-2009, 23:38
172 may not be quicker, but it will certainly win an endurance race :lol:


well that would depend......as u know....some can do quite a lot of mileage...and within an inch of its life pretty much all the time......and still b rite ;)