Renault Clio 2003 vs Peugeot 206 2002
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.4 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 80 HP | 68 HP | |
| Torque: | 185 NM | 150 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.2 seconds | 13.1 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is more dynamic to drive. Renault Clio engine produces 12 HP more power than Peugeot 206, whereas torque is 35 NM more than Peugeot 206. Thanks to more power Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.2 | 4.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 4.7 l/100km | 5.0 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 206, which means that by driving the Renault Clio over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Peugeot 206. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1190 km in combined cycle | 1160 km in combined cycle | |
| 1420 km on highway | 1380 km on highway | ||
| 1060 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Nissan Almera, Nissan Micra, Suzuki Jimny | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Citroen Xsara, Citroen C3, Citroen C2, Peugeot 1007 | |
| 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 Peugeot 206 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 | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Clio is 1 cm shorter than the Peugeot 206, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Clio is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 255 litres | 210 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1037 litres | 992 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Renault Clio has 45 litres more trunk space than the Peugeot 206. The Peugeot 206 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Clio (by 45 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.3 meters | 9.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 0.4 metres more than that of the Peugeot 206, which means Renault Clio can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`515 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Renault Clio has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Peugeot 206 has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Renault Clio, so Renault Clio quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Clio has
|
Peugeot 206 has
| |