Renault Clio 2003 vs Volkswagen Lupo 1998
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.1 Petrol | 1.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 75 HP | 50 HP | |
| Torque: | 105 NM | 86 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 17.7 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is more dynamic to drive. Renault Clio engine produces 25 HP more power than Volkswagen Lupo, whereas torque is 19 NM more than Volkswagen Lupo. Thanks to more power Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 4.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.6 | |
|
The Volkswagen Lupo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Renault Clio consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Lupo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Clio could require 45 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 34 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 600 km in combined cycle | |
| 1020 km on highway | 730 km on highway | ||
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Dacia Logan, Renault Kangoo, Renault Twingo, Dacia Sandero | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volkswagen Polo, Seat Ibiza, Seat Arosa | |
| 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 Volkswagen Lupo 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 | 3.53 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.46 m | |
| Renault Clio is 28 cm longer than the Volkswagen Lupo, width is practically the same , while the height of Renault Clio is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 255 litres | 130 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1035 litres | 830 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage capacity. Renault Clio has 125 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Lupo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Clio (by 205 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 Volkswagen Lupo, which means Renault Clio can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`340 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Volkswagen Lupo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 40 percent more cases than Volkswagen Lupo, so Volkswagen Lupo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Volkswagen Lupo has
| |