Renault Clio 2003 vs Volkswagen Lupo 2003
Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 98 HP | 105 HP | |
Torque: | 127 NM | 130 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.9 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
Volkswagen Lupo is a more dynamic driving. Renault Clio engine produces 7 HP less power than Volkswagen Lupo, whereas torque is 3 NM less than Volkswagen Lupo. Due to the lower power, Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 4.9 | |
The Volkswagen Lupo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Renault Clio consumes 2.4 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 360 litres more fuel. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 34 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 680 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
860 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 3.81 m | 3.53 m | |
Width: | 1.64 m | 1.62 m | |
Height: | 1.42 m | 1.46 m | |
Renault Clio is larger, but slightly lower. Renault Clio is 28 cm longer than the Volkswagen Lupo, 2 cm wider, 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 | no data | |
Renault Clio has more luggage capacity. Renault Clio has 125 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Lupo. | |||
Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 10.3 meters | |
Gross weight (kg): | no data | no data | |
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
| |