Renault Clio 2009 vs Suzuki Swift 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.5 Petrol | |
| Diesel (Renault Clio) engines typically outperform gasoline engines in terms of fuel efficiency and low-end torque. This makes them more economical and better suited for towing or long-distance travel. However, gasoline (Suzuki Swift) engines mostly are lighter, quieter, and offer better acceleration and responsiveness, especially in smaller vehicles. For more information, see the article "Diesel or Petrol: Fuel Economy and Key Differences." | |||
| 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: | 85 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 133 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | 10 seconds | |
|
Suzuki Swift is a more dynamic driving. Renault Clio engine produces 17 HP less power than Suzuki Swift, but torque is 87 NM more than Suzuki Swift. Due to the lower power, Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.7 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.4 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 1.4 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 210 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1170 km in combined cycle | 730 km in combined cycle | |
| 1240 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 1010 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Suzuki SX4, Suzuki Ignis | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Renault Clio 2009 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Renault Clio 2009 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.03 m | 3.70 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.50 m | |
|
Renault Clio is larger, but slightly lower. Renault Clio is 33 cm longer than the Suzuki Swift, 2 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 288 litres | 213 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 562 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage capacity. Renault Clio has 75 litres more trunk space than the Suzuki Swift. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 9.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 1.3 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`655 | 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 (€): | 2400 | 2800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Suzuki Swift has
| |