Renault Clio 2003 vs Mazda Demio 1997
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.1 Petrol | 1.3 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 60 HP | 63 HP | |
| Torque: | 93 NM | 103 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15 seconds | 14 seconds | |
|
Mazda Demio is a more dynamic driving. Renault Clio engine produces 3 HP less power than Mazda Demio, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Mazda Demio. Due to the lower power, Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 6.7 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda Demio, which means that by driving the Renault Clio over 15,000 km in a year you can save 150 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda Demio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 43 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 610 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 710 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 640 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: | 18 years | 18 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Kangoo, Renault Twingo | Used also on Mazda 121 | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda Demio 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: | 3.81 m | 3.82 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.65 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Renault Clio is smaller. Renault Clio is 1 cm shorter than the Mazda Demio, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Clio is 12 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 255 litres | 330 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1035 litres | 1298 litres | |
|
Mazda Demio has more luggage space. Renault Clio has 75 litres less trunk space than the Mazda Demio. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda Demio (by 263 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 9.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 1.1 metres more than that of the Mazda Demio, which means Renault Clio can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`450 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Mazda Demio has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 140 percent more cases than Mazda Demio, so Mazda Demio quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Mazda Demio has
| |