Renault Clio 2008 vs Mitsubishi Colt 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 95 HP | |
| Torque: | 127 NM | 125 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
| Renault Clio engine produces 5 HP more power than Mitsubishi Colt, whereas torque is 2 NM more than Mitsubishi Colt. Thanks to more power Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.9 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Mitsubishi Colt is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Clio could require 120 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Colt. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 970 km on highway | ||
| 790 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 20 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Megane, Renault Modus | Used also on Smart ForFour | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Renault Clio engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | no data | 3.94 m | |
| Width: | no data | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | no data | 1.55 m | |
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 220 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1032 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | no data | 10.8 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`460 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2800 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Mitsubishi Colt has
| |