Talk:Renault Clio V6 RS

Automobiles Low‑importance

	Cars portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Automobiles, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of automobiles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AutomobilesWikipedia:WikiProject AutomobilesTemplate:WikiProject AutomobilesAutomobile articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Brands Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Fuel economy

24 mpg is good, that isn't difficult it shouldn't be under that section

I think the reason why the statement was there is because the Clio is a subcompact, and subcompacts generally get good fuel economy (around 30-50 mpg, depending on several factors). But still, 24 mpg isn't *that* bad. --ApolloBoy 00:22, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Competitors

I know they're vaguely similar in terms of outright power and physical size, but I'd question the infobox's assertion that this car's competitors are the BMW 130i, Ford Focus RS and VW Golf R32. Every one of those "rivals" has a front-engined layout and a very useable back seat; they handle in a completely different manner, and are useable every day, simply as faster versions of their lesser siblings. The more conventional 172/182 served the same purpose in the Clio's range, albeit in a smaller package; the V6 RS is going for a completely different niche - maybe the same one as the old Toyota MR2 GTS Turbo was aiming at 15 years ago, but there's not much there nowadays. Too heavy to compare to a Lotus Elise/Opel Speedster? Too cheap to compare to a Porsche Cayman? What about the compact sports car market - Audi TT, Nissan 350Z, Mazda RX-8, etc? I'd say they're a closer match. -- DeLarge 08:54, 8 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This needs sharpening: "there is only a small space where the engine used to be, suitable for a holdall, and whatever you can fit in the passenger seat". This is not quite correct. There is space behind the engine, and a useful netted space in front of the engine. There's more space on top of the engine cover.

and:

"- and the enhanced steering makes tight manoeuvreing quite the chore." The steering isn' 'enhanced' as such....there are plastic bushes restricting steering so the tyres don't foul the wheel wells. I find the car perfectly ok as a daily driver including using a very cramped multi-story carpark.

magazine article?

this wikipedia entry looks as if it was copied directly from an article from a magazine, or made for a magazine. i'd love to change it but know little to nothing about the clio.- Cirilobeto (talk) 04:19, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Shooting brake

Can the Clio V6 considered as a shooting brake? It's just a 2-seater hatchback. 120.141.153.17 (talk) 05:29, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Phase 2 engine performance

Actually Porsche only did some of the engine calibration activities on the Phase 2 version. The power gains were due to to modifications carried out by TWR. These were:

New intake system New intake manifold New larger throttle body New fuel rail Larger injectors Modified cylinder head Modified intake & exhaust valves New intake cam profile Modified pistons — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.4.149.253 (talk) 11:04, 27 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]