Renault Clio 2001 vs Peugeot 206 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.1 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 105 NM | 147 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 9.4 seconds | |
|
Peugeot 206 is a more dynamic driving. Renault Clio engine produces 35 HP less power than Peugeot 206, whereas torque is 42 NM less than Peugeot 206. Due to the lower power, Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 3.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 6.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 6.9 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 206, which means that by driving the Renault Clio over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 206. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 780 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Dacia Logan, Renault Kangoo, Renault Twingo, Dacia Sandero | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Peugeot 307, Citroen Xsara, Citroen C3, Peugeot 207 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Peugeot 206 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Peugeot 206 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. | |||
| Peugeot 206 2000 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 Peugeot 206 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.81 m | 3.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.65 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Clio is 1 cm shorter than the Peugeot 206, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Clio is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 510 litres | 245 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1130 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Renault Clio has 265 litres more trunk space than the Peugeot 206. The Peugeot 206 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 9.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 0.4 metres more than that of the Peugeot 206, which means Renault Clio can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`500 | 1`553 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Peugeot 206 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Peugeot 206, so Peugeot 206 quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Peugeot 206 has
| |