Renault Clio 2003 vs Volkswagen Golf 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.1 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 60 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 93 NM | 126 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 15 seconds | 14.7 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Golf is a more dynamic driving. Renault Clio engine produces 15 HP less power than Volkswagen Golf, whereas torque is 33 NM less than Volkswagen Golf. Due to the lower power, Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 0.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.0 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.2 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf, which means that by driving the Renault Clio over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 1.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| 800 km with real consumption | 740 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Kangoo, Renault Twingo | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Polo, Skoda Octavia, Skoda Fabia, Audi A2 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Golf 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. | |||
| Volkswagen Golf 2003 1.4 engine: Engine is known for its simplicity, compact design, and overall reliability. Many complaints from owners are related to power loss or fluctuating idle, often caused by issues with the throttle body, EGR valve, or air leaks ... More about Volkswagen Golf 2003 1.4 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.81 m | 4.20 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Renault Clio is smaller. Renault Clio is 39 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Golf, 12 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Clio is 6 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 255 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1035 litres | 1305 litres | |
|
Volkswagen Golf has more luggage space. Renault Clio has 95 litres less trunk space than the Volkswagen Golf. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Volkswagen Golf (by 270 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 0.6 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Golf, which means Renault Clio can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`780 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Volkswagen Golf has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Volkswagen Golf, so Volkswagen Golf quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 5.0/10 | 8.2/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Volkswagen Golf has
| |