Renault Clio 2000 vs Volkswagen Polo 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 80 HP | 64 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 124 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.8 seconds | 15.6 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is more dynamic to drive. Renault Clio engine produces 16 HP more power than Volkswagen Polo, whereas torque is 36 NM more than Volkswagen Polo. Thanks to more power Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 2.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 5.7 | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Renault Clio consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that by driving the Renault Clio over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 960 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 1160 km on highway | 1020 km on highway | ||
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Megane, Renault Espace | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Audi 80, Seat Toledo, Skoda Felicia | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen Polo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Polo 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: | 3.77 m | 3.74 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.63 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.42 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Clio is 3 cm longer than the Volkswagen Polo, 1 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 255 litres | 245 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1035 litres | 975 litres | |
| Renault Clio has 10 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Polo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Clio (by 60 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`530 | 1`435 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | above average | |
| Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |