Mitsubishi Colt 1996 vs Renault Clio 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.3 Petrol | 1.1 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 60 HP | |
| Torque: | 108 NM | 93 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 15 HP more power than Renault Clio, whereas torque is 15 NM more than Renault Clio. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 700 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 27 years | 18 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Mitsubishi Lancer | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Kangoo, Renault Twingo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 3.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.68 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.36 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is larger, but lower. Mitsubishi Colt is 11 cm longer than the Renault Clio, 4 cm wider, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 240 litres | 255 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | 1035 litres | |
| Despite its longer length, Mitsubishi Colt has 15 litres less trunk space than the Renault Clio. This could mean that the Mitsubishi Colt 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 205 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.3 metres less than that of the Renault Clio. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`445 | 1`420 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Renault Clio has
| |