Renault Clio 2000 vs Peugeot 206 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 135 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is more dynamic to drive. Renault Clio engine produces 20 HP more power than Peugeot 206, whereas torque is 13 NM more than Peugeot 206. Thanks to more power Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 2.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.8 l/100km | 8.4 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio 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 more fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 206, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Clio could require 30 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Clio consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 206. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 830 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 640 km with real consumption | 590 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 26 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Citroen Xsara, Peugeot 306, Citroen Xsara Picasso, Peugeot 106 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Clio might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Renault Clio 2000 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 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.77 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 5 cm shorter than the Peugeot 206, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Clio is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 255 litres | 245 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1035 litres | 1130 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Renault Clio has 10 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. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Peugeot 206 (by 95 litres). | |||
| 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): | no data | 1`525 | |
| Safety: | |||
| 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 (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Peugeot 206 has
| |