Renault Clio 2005 vs Mazda 2 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 65 HP | 80 HP | |
| Torque: | 105 NM | 124 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 14.9 seconds | 13.9 seconds | |
|
Mazda 2 is a more dynamic driving. Renault Clio engine produces 15 HP less power than Mazda 2, whereas torque is 19 NM less than Mazda 2. Due to the lower power, Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 6.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.6 l/100km | 7.3 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2, which means that by driving the Renault Clio over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 2. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 750 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.99 m | 3.92 m | |
| Width: | 1.71 m | 1.68 m | |
| Height: | 1.49 m | 1.53 m | |
|
Renault Clio is larger, but slightly lower. Renault Clio is 7 cm longer than the Mazda 2, 3 cm wider, while the height of Renault Clio is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 288 litres | 268 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1035 litres | 1044 litres | |
| Renault Clio has 20 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 2. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 2 (by 9 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 9.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 0.5 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): | no data | 1`495 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mazda 2 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 110 percent more cases than Mazda 2, so Mazda 2 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 1600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Mazda 2 has
| |