Mazda 2 2019 vs Renault Clio 2020
| Comparing electrical vehicle (EV) with combustion engine (ICE) one is a complex task, but we are doing our best. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.6 Hybrid | |
| Petrol engines (Mazda 2) are generally cheaper to purchase and maintain, with simpler mechanics and consistent highway performance. Hybrid (Renault Clio) engines, on the other hand, provide significantly better fuel efficiency and lower emissions, especially in urban and stop-and-go traffic conditions. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 112 HP | 91 HP | |
| Torque: | 144 NM | 144 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | n/a seconds | 9.9 seconds | |
| Mazda 2 engine produces 21 HP more power than Renault Clio, the torque is the same for both cars. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Consumption: | 5.3 l/100km | 4.3 l/100km | |
| Fuel cost per 100km: | 9.50 € | no data | |
|
Change fuel prices per unit to adjust the calculation to the fuel prices in your country. Petrol€/l | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 44 litres | 39 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 900 km in combined cycle | |
| 950 km on highway | 960 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.07 m | 4.05 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.44 m | |
| Mazda 2 is 2 cm longer than the Renault Clio, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 2 is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 250 litres | 301 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
950 litres | 979 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Mazda 2 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Clio (by 29 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.4 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 2 is 1 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: | no data | 1`758 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 16 600 | 11 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 2 has
|
Renault Clio has
| |