Skoda Fabia 2010 vs Renault Clio 2009
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.2 Petrol | 1.1 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 175 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.1 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Skoda Fabia is more dynamic to drive. Skoda Fabia engine produces 5 HP more power than Renault Clio, whereas torque is 30 NM more than Renault Clio. Thanks to more power Skoda Fabia reaches 100 km/h speed 0.9 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.3 | 5.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.5 l/100km | 6.8 l/100km | |
|
The Skoda Fabia is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Skoda Fabia consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio, which means that by driving the Skoda Fabia over 15,000 km in a year you can save 75 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Skoda Fabia consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 940 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1140 km on highway | ||
| 690 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Clio gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 14 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Polo, Seat Altea, Skoda Yeti | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Twingo, Renault Modus | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Skoda Fabia might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Skoda Fabia 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. | |||
| Skoda Fabia 2010 1.2 engine: Although the engine has a chain, its lifetime is relatively short. Vibration at idling speed tends to be excessive. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.00 m | 4.03 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.50 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Skoda Fabia is smaller, but slightly higher. Skoda Fabia is 3 cm shorter than the Renault Clio, 7 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 300 litres | 288 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Skoda Fabia has 12 litres more trunk space than the Renault Clio. The Renault Clio may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Skoda Fabia is 0.3 metres less than that of the Renault Clio. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`585 | 1`570 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Renault Clio has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Skoda Fabia has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Renault Clio, so Renault Clio quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3200 | 4000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Skoda Fabia has
|
Renault Clio has
| |