golf gti is a 2.0L clio rs is 1.6L
VW Golf GTI Performance vs Renault Clio RS 220 Trophy
| Category | Clio RS 220 Trophy | Golf GTI Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Max power (ps / bhp) | 220 / 217 | 230 / 227 |
| Max torque (Nm / lb-ft) | 280 / 207 | 350 / 258 |
| Curb weight (kg / lb) | 1264 / 2787 | 1409 / 3106 |
| Power / tonne (ps / bhp) | 174 / 172 | 163 / 161 |
| Average price | €28,000 | €34,000 |
Lap Times
Acceleration
| Speed & distance | Clio RS 220 Trophy | Golf GTI Performance |
|---|---|---|
| 0 - 50 kph | 2.5 s | 2.6 s |
| 0 - 60 kph | 3.2 s | 3.3 s |
| 0 - 80 kph | 4.7 s | 4.6 s |
| 0 - 100 kph | 6.4 s | 6.0 s |
| 0 - 120 kph | 8.9 s | 8.2 s |
| 0 - 130 kph | 9.8 s | 9.2 s |
| 0 - 140 kph | 11.9 s | 10.9 s |
| 0 - 160 kph | 14.8 s | 13.5 s |
| 0 - 180 kph | 17.8 s | 17.8 s |
| 0 - 200 kph | 25.8 s | 23.1 s |
| 60 - 100 kph (4) | 3.6 s | 4.6 s |
| 80 - 120 kph (5) | 6.5 s | 6.0 s |
| 80 - 120 kph (6) | 9.4 s | 7.1 s |
| 80 - 120 kph | 4.4 s | 3.7 s |
| Est. 100 - 200 kph | 19.1 s | 17.3 s |
| 0 - 100 mph | 14.8 s | 14.1 s |
| Est. 1/8 mile | 10.4 s @ 82.6 mph | 10.2 s @ 83.9 mph |
| 1/4 mile | 14.7 s | 14.4 s |
| Est. 1/2 mile | 24.2 s @ 121.8 mph | 23.6 s @ 124.3 mph |
General performance
| Category | Clio RS 220 Trophy | Golf GTI Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Top speed | 235 kph (146 mph) | 250 kph (155 mph) |
| Est. max acceleration | 0.47 g (5 m/s²) | 0.49 g (5 m/s²) |
| 18m slalom | 68.3 kph (42.4 mph) | 69.5 kph (43.2 mph) |
| Fuel economy | 5.4 l/100 km (44 mpg US / 53 UK) | 7.9 l/100 km (30 mpg US / 36 UK) |
| 100 kph - 0 | 34 m (110 ft) | 34 m (110 ft) |
Summary
| Category | Clio RS 220 Trophy | Golf GTI Performance |
|---|---|---|
| Track Performance | 782 | 773 |
| Straight line speed | 2585 | 2794 |
| Total | 3367 | 3567 |
Verdict
Golf GTI Performance is the fastest by a small margin.
This comparison has been viewed 7.9k times.
Acceleration graph
Nixou 9y ago
The following example is particularly talkative
Renault Megane RS 275 Trophy R vs VW Golf R (Mk VII)
1 second advantage on 0-100 to the Golf R (4wd). And that's all, nothing more counted there as being superior. Still it earns 60 points for that single small difference.
On the other side the MRS has well better track stats on every circuit with 20 seconds difference on the nurb and 2 seconds difference on small circuits (which is quite huge for a "slower" vehicle)
Yet the verdict says Golf 7 "wins". A single 0-100 difference gave it 60 points advantage, a quite poorer track performance on every circuit made it lose only 25 relative points.
A faster car should be faster on track, what it loses on corners, it earns on straights so I'm not sure those 0-100 should take THAT much advantage in calculations.
Nixou 9y ago
Fastestlaps ok sorry about saying theorical thing. What I mean't saying "theorical" is that their results straight line times in this case do not translate on circuit performance which is IMO more important to judge a sports car.
BR2+ Personnally I prefer track stats, IMO they give an overall better and more real feel on sports car capabilities.
BR2+ 9y ago
Well, What stat are you most likely to use in these cars? Acceleration stats or track stats?....
But i sorta agree that the system does seem to put more on acceleration stats then track stats<(First Paragraph) But other then The Ring, The only thing that stands out more is the acceleration times on a bigger margin.
FastestLaps 9y ago
The bias might be incorrect (its debatable), but those are certainly not "theoretical stats". They are factual results of real tests.
There are theoretical results in other pages, but those are always distinguishable by "(est)" in their name.
Nixou 9y ago
Yet another example of bias towards straight line theorical stats.
The supposed winner gets beaten on every possible circuit.
