Renault Clio 2009 vs Suzuki SX4 2006
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| 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: | 110 HP | 107 HP | |
| Torque: | 151 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.4 seconds | 12.3 seconds | |
| Renault Clio engine produces 3 HP more power than Suzuki SX4, whereas torque is 6 NM more than Suzuki SX4. Despite the higher power, Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 7.6 | |
| Renault Clio consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki SX4, which means that by driving the Renault Clio over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 730 km in combined cycle | 650 km in combined cycle | |
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 26 years | 24 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 Suzuki Grand Vitara, Suzuki Swift, Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Vitara | |
| 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 2009 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 2009 1.6 engine Suzuki SX4 2006 1.6 engine: A simple and robust engine, not particularly demanding in terms of fuel quality. High engine timing chain lifetime. Tends to increase oil consumption, head gasket failures may occur. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.23 m | 4.10 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.73 m | |
| Height: | 1.51 m | 1.56 m | |
| Renault Clio is 13 cm longer than the Suzuki SX4, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Clio is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 439 litres | 270 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1045 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage capacity. Renault Clio has 169 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki SX4. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 0.1 metres more than that of the Suzuki SX4. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`705 | 1`650 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Suzuki SX4 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Suzuki SX4, so Suzuki SX4 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 3200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Suzuki SX4 has
| |