fiestaturbo.com

[dude17_uk]

I am selling my Nova GTE 112000k, 89 G plate, Black.

and have just had a call saying sum 1 wants to swap it for there K plate Renault 19 16v MOT till october, taxed till augest, thugsten grey.

Does any 1 know if it would b a good swap ?

I don't know alot about renault 19 16 valves are they very good/reliable motors ? and are they very quick ?

many Thanks Peeps

[elm_us]

yes they are fast, well fearly, and no they aint very reliable as they are french

u will need about 1-2k to get a good one that aint fooked, and if it goes wrong they aint cheap, the front suspension bolts are £15 EACH

[Mr Jungle]

I would really look the 19 over well. I mean REALLY look it over, sounds fishy to me.

[Tom_S]

They are pretty quick as they share the same engine as my clio, 1.8 & 137bhp

Just check it out and if it's ok, it'll be a good swap.

They are just very cheaply priced, K-Tec Racing sold their demo 19 16v for £1200 AFAIK & that had quite a few mods including 17"s.

You could find out more by asking on the cliosport forum as they are similar to the clio 16v's & I know there are people on there with 19 16vs

[mortos2]

i have been in a williams clio, thay or suposed to be very quick..but after driving it i was very disapointed it felt nice and cornerd well but that 16v engine just dident seem to go..the clio williams has 150 bhp..at the time my erst was standard but did have a uprated actuater running 9 psi. at 10 psi you should get around 150 bhp ,i raced the clio and blew it into the winds,the guy was well fed up as he was my neighbour..so the 132 bhp r19 wud be prety slow mate

all the best
andy

[FlyKai]

Yeah the R19 16v's r really cheap nowadays, it's not necessarily something inherently wrong with it. Check it out tho.

Can be expensive 2 maintain tho, more so than a nova.

An ERST would prob be quicker, but if u keep the revs high, usually above 4000revs-this is where the power band is for 16valvers, 8valvers pull lower down in the rev range, but don't rev as high-there won't be much in it.

Check it out and drive it, then see how you feel.

[Tom_S]

A Turbo car running 150bhp will be faster than a 150bhp N/A car because it'll have more torque.

I think the 19 16v's do a low-mid 8s 0-60s and about 128mph so not that slow! Quicker than the nova!

[FlyKai]

yeah, forced induction cars r bound to produce more torque. But let's not forget the 19 16v is a v. competent car. Like the clio 16v (same engine), they do like to be revved, and you will be rewarded with an awesome sound from the engine. I'd defo have r19 over a nova.

[elm_us]

A Turbo car running 150bhp will be faster than a 150bhp N/A car because it'll have more torque.

I think the 19 16v's do a low-mid 8s 0-60s and about 128mph so not that slow! Quicker than the nova!

0-60 is around 8s

and will do 142

[Tom_S]

and will do 142

err.....where did you get this figure?

It shares the same engine as the clio 16v and that's 130mph standard.

My valver is running almost 145bhp and I've not hit 140mph yet, so don't see how a standard heavier 19 16v will do 142!

[Mr Jungle]

Yeah there is alot of Bull flying around about the 19's top speed, id agree with the above and say 130 max.

I did 140 in my old Cav GSi but thats a 2.0 Lite 16v with 150 Bhp

[gibbo1800]

yes they are fast, its only the doors that weigh anything , as they are very light cars

[Sunil_FiestaRS_16V]

my mate has a renault 19 chamade 16v (saloon) an my RS1800 whoops it easily top end (mine goes off the 140 clocks) and accelaration

[elm_us]

feel like this road has been driven down before,

i have seen 142, on a R19 16v, then it blow up actuly

many other R19 owners also say they have seen 140 this can be a acurate as a nova doing 250mph, either way

[gibbo1800]

250MHP?

[SpeedX]

i have had 140mph out my 19 16v totally standard

[Captain Tightpants]

So you dug up a three year old post to tell us?!



Steve

[Oranoco]

140mph is a clock reading and not the vehicles actual speed. I'm amased at the number of goons who look at their speedo and think it's correct

Take at least 10% off the speedo reading to be halfway close to the real speed. Which in this case would be 126mph, about spot on foir the manufacturers claim

[scotty_boy]

140mph is a clock reading and not the vehicles actual speed. I'm amased at the number of goons who look at their speedo and think it's correct

Take at least 10% off the speedo reading to be halfway close to the real speed. Which in this case would be 126mph, about spot on foir the manufacturers claim

Yeah. Me and Bryce came back from Sixfields testing the speedo vs the GPS and at 130 on the clocks it was only pulling 123mph. It had a littlemore, so it'll only really make the book figure of 128mph

[Max M4X WW]

Woo that means my car does 103.5mph then