1996 Citroen Saxo VTS

Echappement Performaces Saxo VTS:

o-100 km/h 8,0 sec
quarter mile 16,0 sec
0-1000m 29,4 sec

Scan:
http://img183.imageshack.us/f/compar34.jpg/

Echappement test Saxo Kit Car 200ps vs 106 maxi 225ps comparo

Scans:

http://img178.imageshack.us/f/106maxi1.jpg/
http://img21.imageshack.us/f/106maxi2.jpg/
http://img9.imageshack.us/f/106maxi3.jpg/
http://img32.imageshack.us/f/106maxi4.jpg/

Saxo VTS;

0-100 km/h 8,0 sec

0-400m 16,0 sec

0-1000m 29,4 sec

Echappement performances test Scan:

http://www.forum-auto.com/uploads/200412/will88_1102720997_comparatif_c2_saxo.jpg

7s is highly doubtfull for a stock Saxo. even a CrossFire with 215bhp does it in 6.7s, fwd and 120bhp, thats nt gonna do 7s flat.

Unless this hit 60 in second gear, mmm it probably was.

These are quicker than 8.7, these reach 62 in second gear, the 106 doesn't. 8.0 torque-less seconds for this.

LOL 7 Flat!

Lol.

Standard VTS will do 7 Flat! Hahahahah ude, who are you kidding? 7Flat is not gonna happen in this car, not a chance, not even with removing the spare tyre LOL and adding a new manifold and taking out the back seats and new exhaust, is not stock, and even if you did all that, still wouldnt do no 6.0 LOL

The standard vts will do 0-60 in 7 flat no matter what the figurea say, take out the spare tyre and it's under 7. Ram air inducion and 421 manifold with some overfuelling and 6.3 or 6.4 is more accurate. Back seats out and full exhaust more like 6.1 6.0. Sorry dickheads.
Yoooooooooo!!!!!!!!

106 is a lower insurance group, and has slower 0-60 because Peugeot tested the car with more weight (more passengers and full tank, opposed to Citroen being half a tank and just the driver), it was done like this to purposely give the car a lower insurance group.

The weights may vary slightly, but they're pretty much identical.

Give two matched drivers two completley standard cars and they should be pretty much even.

OMG why do you people even care?

A stock saxo is in between 7.5-8.0seconds, topspeed is about 210-218 on gps, not going downhill.

no one cares about inaccurate youtube speedometer videos especialy if the car was modded

This is under 7 sec. from 0-100km/h
http://www.youtube.com/user/0xas#p/u/0/euDuSugd9qM

Mods: lightly stripped car, airbox & exhaustsystem

Saxo/106 are 100% the same different times came from different driverskills, wheater, grip/tyres and engine condition

i have a saxo 1.1 with a vts engine in it and it leaves 106 gti's for dead and as for vtr's when i hit 100mph its like 100yrds behind me

well anyone wonder why the vts is insurance group 14 and the 106 gti is 13, you do the math, 106's weigh more, i have a vts and it kills 106 gti's


FACT

Why would anyone even care.....

I had a race with a Fiesta ST i was behind and it was uphill and i had to back off or i would i hit him , it could if been slip stream but still he wasn't leaving me u guys pay these group 13/14 insurance for cars that are no quicker at normal speeds like upto 100mph but pay for a poncy 5mph extra it's laughable just get a god dam bike for christ sake save money and do 0-60 in 3 instead of 8.7.

That 0-60 time is 100% correct , i've got a 100bhp vtr and i had races with vts's and of the line they are not 1.5 seconds quicker and even upto 100mph they are only a tiny bit in front so i say 8.7 sounds about right next to the 9.1 vtr's time.

Jon, I now drive an ST, coming from a 106 Gti (same as a VTS), the ST is more fun to drive, believe.

i own a 58 plate zetec s mk6 it is fast but i want a sxo vts but have to wait till i paid car off in 3 years

Whoever put the Ford Fiesta ST? I am a Ford tech. A Saxo VTS may have a chav image but it would beat a Fiesta ST round a short circuit and is much more fun to drive.

this car is not safe and its crap and cheap get a better car if you have one of these it could save your life.