What Renault could have done with the Trophy.

[OliS]

I appreciate as much as anyone that the Trophy is a great hot hatch, but if anything, what would you liked to have seen the Trophy released with?

For me it is more power! I was really hoping that Renault were going to release a Clio with the Meggy 225 engine in it, failing that I was hoping that they were going to do a similar thing that they did with the Williams as compared to the 16v, ie increased displacement etc.

Other than that I think the Trophy is spot on, the chassis is so sweet, just reckoned it could have had a few more ponies under the bonnet.

 

[mr StinKa gob]

Renault could afford to spend lots on the Williams because its sole purpose for design was to allow Renaultsport to go racing. The f7r was an engine designed for a rally car, and put in the Williams to follow hologation rules. Except for the Williams, the f7r on the williams only ever appeared in racing spyders or rally cars.

I understand that the Williams name was a marketing opportunity, but renault really didnt care if they made any money on the williams 1. It was a pure out and out homologation car. For example not many people know its front suspension was based on the Clio Cup race cars. Renault could have used the 16v subframe, but the made a reinforced one for extra rigidity. A unique gearbox, using tougher components than the 16v one. A unique manifold.

With the Trophy, the idea was to make money. A different objective. So they couldn't develop a new engine, it would be cost prohibitive. They had to make a great car for the road but keep costs to little over that of a 182.

The williams 2 and 3 is wher renault actually made some money back. They would have losts alot of money selling just a few thousand williams after all that development. So the 2 and 3 was to claw back some cash.

You have to realise that the trophy and williams had different purposes. Remember the Williams 1 was sold at the same price as the normal 16v, reno didnt care, they needed to sell a certain number of units to allow them to enter the 2 litre engine in the rally cars. That was the sole mission.
.

However if the 182 was for homologation purposes then i would have like to see the following:

2.2 litre non turbo engine putting out 200 bhp
LSD
Curb weight of 950 kgs
Unique gearbox strengthened
Push botton start (gimick but we all love it)
Brembo brakes with same suspension as present

 

[OliS]

Engine bored out to 2.2 would have been great, with loads more torque, would have been awesome in the Trophy with it's relatively light weight!

 

[Nik]

Yep, agree with what Stromba says. Development costs of fitting the Meggy 225 engine or displacement increase would have been to expensive for such a small run of cars unless there was some motorsport holomogation reason behind it.

Maybe they could have extracted a few more horses by using some of the more common aftermarket changes i.e. matched inlent manifolds, ecu tweaks, cams, and possibly even a stainless exhaust system as standard, but these also have their downsides and are best left to owner preference and the appropriate tuning companies.

Perfectly happy with it how it is though

 

[mr StinKa gob]

I think for a big performance step up in acceleration and handling they shoulf have charged 16k and fitted a lds as standard. Would have put it clear ahead of the 182 other models then. At the moment the times are too similar imo.

 

[rswestling]

Well, since Renault decided not to do it, anyone with a Trophy could do the following:

1. Throttle body from K-Tec
2. Quaiffe ABT LSD and quickshift
3. Full stainless exhaust and sports cat
4. Programable ECU
5. Pagid pads

This would probably result in about 210 bhp or thereabouts. With the LSD you could put most of this down, but the dynamics would change quite a bit. (overstear might turn into understear, etc.).

Of course the above would also set you back about £5,500. (But boy would it be quick!)

-robert

 

[Nik]

Yeah an LSD would have been good, certainly had impressive results on the couple of 172 Cups i've seen with them on track.

I wonder how much it would change the on road handling though, I know the Focus RS was criticised for feeling like it was trying to put you into the nearest hedge. :?

 

[mr StinKa gob]

Depemds on the lsd and how its set up, cheap ones tend to be a little improvement, more expensive ones more so.

 

[OliS]

I personally don't see the point in an LSD on the Trophy, I don't have any problems with traction or torque steer, I find the Trophy puts down it's power exceptionally well. Maybe if Renault had released the Trophy with a lot more power then it would have been neccesary.

Another thing I would have liked to have seen in the Trophy would have been no back seats and some lovely fixed buckets. The room in the back is not sufficient to carry 4 or 5 adults around, so why bother with the expensive reclining Recaro's?

 

[mr StinKa gob]

The lsd doesnt just prevent wheel spin though. If you get one which retains a degree of wheel lock on corners you can prevent / reduce lift off oversteer for example. It also helps balance the car, and would improve traction in the wet on muddy roads (which even a 1.1 engined car might lose traction on).

But i agree its not that important on some cars.

 

[strike]

2.2 litre non turbo engine putting out 200 bhp
LSD
Curb weight of 950 kgs
Unique gearbox strengthened
Push botton start (gimick but we all love it)
Brembo brakes with same suspension as present

Oh my word can you imagine! This list is about right I reckon.

 

[matt the cat]

or the turbo conversion from k-tec, mmmmmm 240 bhp! :twisted:

 

[DieHard]

short throw gearstick
rear spoiler that lets the boot open fully (sick of having to 'limbo' under it !)
keyless access with no visible locks on door
slightly smaller steering wheel (and a better turning circle would be nice)

happy with performance and hadling and would hate the clio to turn out like the Astra VXR (ie - too much power for the chassis)

 

[mr StinKa gob]

On the 172 182 / williams / 16 v boxes, if you fit a short throw gearstick, all that happens is that you beat the synchros on the change and end up trashing your box. A faster gear change would have necessitated a different gearbox set up. People that fit quick shift kits to these cars are stupid.

And you cant have a better turning circle without changing the steering geometry, which on a car like this is failry integral to the design.

 

[Carnut]

Has anyone looked at BBR's Morego conversion for the Trophy engine which includes a new exhaust?
Yes I know its expensive at £1800 fitted but it gives about 202 bhp and that might help keep up when the MK 3 sport is released.
If you keep all the original bits you could maintain its authenticity for the future.
As a side comment, what a fantastic report in Evo. The best yet against the best cars in the world.........

=D> =D> =D>

 

[R55 MUR]

Hi guys, just resgistered to this forum this morning, I've had my car just over 2 months and very impressed for the value.

I spoke to Morego after seeing the review in Evo and would be keen to do the package without the cam change. They quoted figures of 194bhp and 167ft lb of torque. They also give a 3 year warranty on the work.
The only problem for me here is they are in Northamptonshire, whereas I'm from the NorthEast of Scotland. I'm struggling to find places with good reputations up here.

Has anyone done any mods to their cars and got genuine figures?

Ross

 

[George K]

I would have appreciated adjustable dampers and front camber - it is hard to understand why it runs so little at the front, over a degree less than the rear. The challenge cars run over 3 degrees, which is too extreme for the road, but certainly 1.5 to 2.0 would not be. For personal preference compared with every other car that I drive the gear lever is too far forward, which is fine for road use, but could catch me out on the track.
As far as engine work is concerned the most sensible results appear to come from GDI/Angel Works or Hillpower. In both cases they have found that modifying the inlet manifold and re-mapping makes a siginificant difference, the former could have been a standard fit. The cams are quite mild, with only 9.00 mm lift, I believe, and again Angel Works, by starting from scratch with a bigger base circle go to over 11.00 mm whilst retaining timing which enhances the mid range..

 

[dcw@pr]

im glad they didnt fit a 225 engine - not nearly as fun as the NA 2.0 IMHO

 

[OliS]

Nah, 225 engine in the Clio would have been lairy as hell, torque steering across lanes etc, loads of fun!

182 engine is a stormer though, love driving hard and keeping it in the power band. Do reckon it could have been released with a few more bhp though, the chassis is so sorted I feel like it could easily control around 200bhp, and would have helped to make it even more special than the std 182's.

 

[dcw@pr]

yup, i'd agree with the previous posters - a 2.2 would have been great if it had kept the same character as the 2.0 but with 10% more torque