Mitsubishi Colt 2008 vs Renault Clio 2008
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
| Gearbox: | Manual/Automatic | Manual/Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engines: | 1.1 - 1.5 (petrol) | 1.1 - 1.6 (petrol, diesel) | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 - 109 HP | 75 - 128 HP | |
| Torque: | 100 - 145 NM | 105 - 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10 - 13.2 seconds | 9.3 - 13.4 seconds | |
| Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 - 6.2 | 4.7 - 7.5 | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt petrol engines consumes on average 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than Renault Clio. This comparison does not take engine capacity into account, so to compare the fuel consumption of specific engines, select the car version! | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.94 m | 4.03 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.55 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller, but higher. Mitsubishi Colt is 9 cm shorter than the Renault Clio, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 220 litres | 288 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1032 litres | no data | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage space. Mitsubishi Colt has 68 litres less trunk space than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.1 metres more than that of the Renault Clio. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`457 | ~ 1`628 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Renault Clio has
| |