Mazda 2 2015 vs Renault Clio 2016
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.1 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Mazda 2 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 2 engine produces 15 HP more power than Renault Clio, the torque is the same for both cars. Thanks to more power Mazda 2 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.4 | 3.2 | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Mazda 2 consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 2 could require 30 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 43 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1260 km in combined cycle | 1400 km in combined cycle | |
| 1340 km on highway | 1450 km on highway | ||
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 143 mm (5.6 inches) | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 2 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 2 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mazda 3 | Installed on at least 16 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Renault Megane, Dacia Duster | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mazda 2 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. | |||
| Renault Clio 2016 1.5 engine: The engine has undergone numerous modifications and is relatively commonplace, with a plentiful supply of spare parts. It exhibits an optimal fuel consumption/power ratio. However, the fuel injection system ... More about Renault Clio 2016 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.06 m | 4.06 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Mazda 2 is smaller, but higher. Mazda 2 and Renault Clio are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 280 litres | 300 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
950 litres | no data | |
| Mazda 2 has 20 litres less trunk space than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.4 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 2 is 1.6 metres less than that of the Renault Clio, which means Mazda 2 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`575 kg | 1`695 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`040 kg | 1`090 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 535 kg | 605 kg | |
| Mazda 2 load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 13 procentiem less than Renault Clio. Therefore, Renault Clio is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 9400 | 6200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 2 has
|
Renault Clio has
| |