Seat Arosa 1997 vs Renault Clio 1998
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.0 Petrol | 1.1 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 50 HP | 60 HP | |
| Torque: | 86 NM | 93 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 17.4 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is a more dynamic driving. Seat Arosa engine produces 10 HP less power than Renault Clio, whereas torque is 7 NM less than Renault Clio. Due to the lower power, Seat Arosa reaches 100 km/h speed 2.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
By specification Seat Arosa consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio, which means that by driving the Seat Arosa over 15,000 km in a year you can save 60 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Seat Arosa consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 35 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 740 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 540 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Clio 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: | 3 years | 18 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Volkswagen Polo, Seat Ibiza, Volkswagen Lupo | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Kangoo, Renault Twingo | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Seat Arosa 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: | 3.54 m | 3.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.42 m | |
| Seat Arosa is 23 cm shorter than the Renault Clio, width is practically the same , while the height of Seat Arosa is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 130 litres | 255 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
790 litres | 1035 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage space. Seat Arosa has 125 litres less trunk space than the Renault Clio. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Clio (by 245 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Seat Arosa is 0.5 metres less than that of the Renault Clio, which means Seat Arosa can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`360 | 1`420 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Seat Arosa has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Seat Arosa, so Seat Arosa quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Seat Arosa has
|
Renault Clio has
| |