Renault Clio 2008 vs Mazda 2 2007
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.5 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: | 197 HP | 103 HP | |
| Torque: | 215 NM | 137 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6.9 seconds | 10.4 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is more dynamic to drive. Renault Clio engine produces 94 HP more power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 78 NM more than Mazda 2. Thanks to more power Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 3.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.9 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.9 l/100km | 7.0 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 2 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Clio could require 450 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 1.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 770 km on highway | 870 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 610 km with real consumption | ||
| Mazda 2 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 27 years | 13 years | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Renault Clio 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.99 m | 3.90 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.48 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Renault Clio is larger. Renault Clio is 9 cm longer than the Mazda 2, 7 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 288 litres | 250 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 787 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage capacity. Renault Clio has 38 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 1.2 metres more than that of the Mazda 2, which means Renault Clio can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`690 | 1`485 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 4000 | 2200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |