Renault Clio 2009 vs Mazda 2 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.5 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: | 128 HP | 103 HP | |
| Torque: | 155 NM | 137 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.3 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is more dynamic to drive. Renault Clio engine produces 25 HP more power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 18 NM more than Mazda 2. Thanks to more power Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 7.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 2 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Clio could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 1.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 790 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 980 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 660 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 15 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Renault Twingo | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Clio might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.03 m | 3.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Renault Clio is larger. Renault Clio is 13 cm longer than the Mazda 2, width is practically the same , while the height of Renault Clio is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 288 litres | 250 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 787 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage capacity. Renault Clio has 38 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 0.9 metres more than that of the Mazda 2, which means Renault Clio can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`630 | 1`485 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |