Renault Clio 2004 vs Volkswagen Golf 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain and belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 182 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 7.2 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is more dynamic to drive. Renault Clio engine produces 32 HP more power than Volkswagen Golf, the torque is the same for both cars. Thanks to more power Renault Clio reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.1 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.6 l/100km | 8.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Golf is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Clio consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Clio could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Clio consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 610 km in combined cycle | 760 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 580 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen Golf 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: | 27 years | 5 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 9 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Audi A3, Seat Altea, Seat Leon | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Volkswagen Golf 2003 2.0 engine: 2.0 FSI engine, part of the EA827 family, features a lightweight aluminum block with cast-iron liners and a unique timing system. A toothed belt drives the exhaust camshaft, while the intake camshaft is driven by a single-row chain, which also integrates with the variable valve timing mechanism. The timing regulator is ... More about Volkswagen Golf 2003 2.0 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: | 10.7 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Clio is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Golf. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`490 | 1`850 | |
| 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
| |