Volkswagen Lupo 1998 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: | 17.7 seconds | 15 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Lupo engine produces 10 HP less power than Renault Clio, whereas torque is 7 NM less than Renault Clio. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Lupo reaches 100 km/h speed 2.7 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 6.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
By specification Volkswagen Lupo consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Lupo over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volkswagen Lupo consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 34 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 600 km in combined cycle | 800 km in combined cycle | |
| 730 km on highway | 960 km on highway | ||
| 530 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, Seat Arosa | 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 Volkswagen Lupo 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: | 3.53 m | 3.77 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.42 m | |
| Volkswagen Lupo is 24 cm shorter than the Renault Clio, width is practically the same , while the height of Volkswagen Lupo is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 130 litres | 255 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
830 litres | 1035 litres | |
|
Renault Clio has more luggage space. Volkswagen Lupo 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 205 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 9.8 meters | 10.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Lupo is 0.5 metres less than that of the Renault Clio, which means Volkswagen Lupo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`340 | 1`420 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| Volkswagen Lupo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Volkswagen Lupo, so Volkswagen Lupo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Lupo has
|
Renault Clio has
| |