Renault Clio 2003 vs Citroen C2 2003
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 147 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is more dynamic to drive. Renault Clio and Citroen C2 have the same engine power, but Renault Clio torque is 1 NM more than Citroen C2. Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 1.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.4 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 7.7 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen C2 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C2, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Clio could require 165 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Citroen C2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 41 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 670 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 km on highway | 780 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 530 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 26 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Citroen C3, Peugeot 206, Peugeot 207 | |
| 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 Citroen C2 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 2003 1.6 engine: The engine is very robust and long-lived, up to half a million kilometres, and can suffer minor damage, but overall it is quite reliable. Fuel consumption is relatively high for these engines, but they are not ... More about Renault Clio 2003 1.6 engine Citroen C2 2003 1.6 engine: Relatively reliable engine, the main problems tend to be with the engine control electronics. The engine is demanding on fuel quality and fuel consumption is relatively high. It is highly recommended to ... More about Citroen C2 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.81 m | 3.67 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.66 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.46 m | |
| Renault Clio is 14 cm longer than the Citroen C2, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Clio is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 255 litres | 166 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1035 litres | 879 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage capacity. Renault Clio has 89 litres more trunk space than the Citroen C2. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Clio (by 156 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`515 | 1`430 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Citroen C2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Citroen C2, so Citroen C2 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Citroen C2 has
| |