Has Anyone Test Driven Both The 2.0 And T180's?

[Johan007]

Has anyone test driven both the 2.0 and T180's? How do you think each performed against each other? I am wondering if it is worth the upgrade and extra expense.

[Aldridge Andy]

Has anyone test driven both the 2.0 and T180's? How do you think each performed against each other? I am wondering if it is worth the upgrade and extra expense.

I drove both back-to-back when I was deciding which one to go for.

The 2.0D was comparable to my Focus 1.8 TDCi that I had at the time. The Focus did feel a little bit more willing to be honest.

The 2.2D was the car that I got in to, and went to drive away from the dealers forecourt, on to the dual carrigeway, and instantly it put a smile on my face. The 2.2D just has that little bit extra in the handling and "willingness" stakes.

With the cost of fuel increasing at stupid rates, and people reporting 2.0D returning 50MPG+ against 2.2D 40MPG+ I think if I wanted to be sensible I'd stick with the 2.0D if I want to put a smile on my face when I drive then the 2.2D has it!

[Johan007]

People often forget to factor in the increased cost of tyres from 16" to 17" especially as like to buy the best (eagle F1's etc...) and they need replacing lots. Basically I am stuck between getting the T180 on my next service (due about now) or box tuning with a Toyota approved box but obviously I don not want to stress the engine too much.

Golf are doing a lighter 2.0D Sport with 170bhp or 140bhp versions but I think they are out of my price range.

If I consider everything it maybe the T180. I best test best drive it.

[andytran]

With the cost of fuel increasing at stupid rates, and people reporting 2.0D returning 50MPG+ against 2.2D 40MPG+ I think if I wanted to be sensible I'd stick with the 2.0D if I want to put a smile on my face when I drive then the 2.2D has it!

The 2.0 can put a smile on your face! I love mine, its very nippy in daily driving. On a run Ive seen 56mpg over 300 miles. It cost me £200 for a years fully comp ins.

I too considered the 2.2, but the 2.0 cost £3k less, is cheaper to run in every area and drives very well. I have added a TRD spoiler and 17" alloys to mine and it now looks the part as well!

Andy

[Johan007]

Don't get me wrong the car puts a smile on my face when the I charge the turbo up to the torque range in 2nd and then let fly in 3rd and 4th. It then starts to slow down in 5th and 6th.

[OldSkoO1]

Don't get me wrong the car puts a smile on my face when the I charge the turbo up to the torque range in 2nd and then let fly in 3rd and 4th. It then starts to slow down in 5th and 6th.

in 4th in the t180 you'd probably be doing over 100

your doing 70 in 3rd.

[Johan007]

Well one thing is for sure the 2.0 is embarrassing against Clio I just raced up hill 10 minutes ago, but then again it looked like a heavily modified v6 with stock 255bhp.

[OldSkoO1]

the v6 is very rare - you would know one if you saw one, massive gills on the side, rear mounted engine with those gill intakes and very wide body kit - stupidly quick.

Even the 197 cup clio is quick. Light car with a 2Ltr 200bhp engine. In gear the 197 is similar to the t180 but the problem is, its lighter and slightly more powerful but with less torque.

Although its similar to a type-r and i know what a t180 can do against a type-r uphill.

The v6 would completely destroy a 2.0d and you would hear it too.

[Johan007]

Hmm yes it did not have the huge side vents, it could have been the 197 but it was heavily modified with checkered flag artwork with "Clio Cup" and proper racing wheels but is was very much in another league and I guess I would have needed 500nM to keep up!

I think obsession is because I am playing www.trackmania.com online at work all time (free game worth a go). And I want to win always B)