Ford KA 2008 vs Renault Clio 2005
Select specific versions of each model (by engine capacity, power, drivetrain and gearbox) for an accurate comparison
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual/Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Ford KA is available only with manual gearbox, whereas Renault Clio has both automatic and manual transmission options. | |||
Engines: | 1.2 | 1.2 - 2.0 | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 69 - 75 HP | 60 - 140 HP | |
Torque: | 102 - 145 NM | 93 - 240 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 - 13.1 seconds | 8.5 - 15.2 seconds | |
Select a car version for a more accurate comparison! | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 - 5.1 | 4.3 - 7.9 | |
Ford KA petrol engines consumes on average 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than Renault Clio. On average, Ford KA equipped with diesel engines consume 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the 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: | 3.62 m | 3.96 m | |
Width: | 1.66 m | 1.70 m | |
Height: | 1.51 m | 1.48 m | |
Ford KA is smaller, but slightly higher. Ford KA is 34 cm shorter than the Renault Clio, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Ford KA is 3 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 224 litres | 288 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
710 litres | 1035 litres | |
Renault Clio has more luggage space. Ford KA has 64 litres less trunk space than the Renault Clio. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Clio (by 325 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 9.3 meters | 11.3 meters | |
The turning circle of the Ford KA is 2 metres less than that of the Renault Clio, which means Ford KA can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | ~ 1`368 | ~ 1`656 | |
Safety: | |||
Quality: | below average | below average | |
Average price (€): | 2800 | 1200 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Ford KA has
|
Renault Clio has
| |