Ford Focus 2001 vs Renault Clio 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 148 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
| Ford Focus engine produces 5 HP more power than Renault Clio, whereas torque is 12 NM more than Renault Clio. Despite the higher power, Ford Focus reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.6 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 7.8 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Ford Focus consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Ford Focus could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Ford Focus consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 720 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 910 km on highway | 840 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 640 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 26 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster | |
| 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. | |||
| Renault Clio 2003 1.6 engine: The engine is very robust and long-lived, up to half a million kilometres, and can suffer minor damage, but overall it is quite reliable. Fuel consumption is relatively high for these engines, but they are not ... More about Renault Clio 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.17 m | 3.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Ford Focus is larger. Ford Focus is 36 cm longer than the Renault Clio, 6 cm wider, while the height of Ford Focus is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 255 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1210 litres | 1035 litres | |
|
Ford Focus has more luggage capacity. Ford Focus has 95 litres more trunk space than the Renault Clio. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Ford Focus (by 175 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Ford Focus is 0.2 metres more than that of the Renault Clio. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`650 | 1`515 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Ford Focus has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Ford Focus, so Ford Focus quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 7.4/10 | 5.0/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Ford Focus has
|
Renault Clio has
| |