Renault Clio 2012 vs Mazda 2 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| 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: | 90 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | 10.1 seconds | |
|
Mazda 2 is a more dynamic driving. Renault Clio engine produces 15 HP less power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 20 NM less than Mazda 2. Due to the lower power, Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.2 | 3.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 4.8 l/100km | 4.6 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 2 is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Clio consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that by driving the Renault Clio over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Clio consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1400 km in combined cycle | 1260 km in combined cycle | |
| 1500 km on highway | 1340 km on highway | ||
| 930 km with real consumption | 930 km with real consumption | ||
| 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: | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | 143 mm (5.6 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: | 8 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | Used also on Mazda 3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| 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 2012 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Renault Clio 2012 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.06 m | 4.06 m | |
| Width: | 1.73 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Renault Clio is larger, but lower. Renault Clio and Mazda 2 are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 280 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1146 litres | 950 litres | |
| Renault Clio has 20 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 2. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Clio (by 196 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 9.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 1.2 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: | 1`658 kg | 1`575 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`071 kg | 1`040 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 587 kg | 535 kg | |
| Renault Clio load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 9 procentiem more than Mazda 2. Therefore, Renault Clio is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Renault Clio is better rated in child safety tests. The Renault Clio scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4800 | 9000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |