Renault Clio 2009 vs Suzuki Swift 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.1 Petrol | 1.3 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: | 75 HP | 92 HP | |
| Torque: | 105 NM | 116 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.4 seconds | 12.8 seconds | |
|
Suzuki Swift is a more dynamic driving. Renault Clio engine produces 17 HP less power than Suzuki Swift, whereas torque is 11 NM less than Suzuki Swift. Due to the lower power, Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.6 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift, which means that by driving the Renault Clio over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 930 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 1120 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 840 km with real consumption | 680 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 19 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Dacia Logan, Renault Kangoo, Renault Twingo, Dacia Sandero | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Suzuki Liana, Suzuki Wagon R+, Suzuki Ignis, Suzuki Jimny | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.03 m | 3.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Renault Clio is larger, but lower. Renault Clio is 33 cm longer than the Suzuki Swift, 2 cm wider, while the height of Renault Clio is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 288 litres | 198 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 562 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage capacity. Renault Clio has 90 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 9.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 0.9 metres more than that of the Suzuki Swift, which means Renault Clio can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`570 | 1`485 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Suzuki Swift has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Renault Clio, so Suzuki Swift quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 2400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Suzuki Swift has
| |