Volkswagen Polo 2006 vs Renault Clio 2005
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 112 HP | |
| Torque: | 153 NM | 151 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.4 seconds | 10.2 seconds | |
|
Renault Clio is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 7 HP less power than Renault Clio, but torque is 2 NM more than Renault Clio. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 6.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Polo is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Polo could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 650 km in combined cycle | 750 km in combined cycle | |
| 620 km with real consumption | 650 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. | |||
| Renault Clio 2005 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 2005 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.92 m | 3.99 m | |
| Width: | 1.65 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.49 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is smaller. Volkswagen Polo is 7 cm shorter than the Renault Clio, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 270 litres | 288 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1030 litres | 1035 litres | |
| Volkswagen Polo has 18 litres less trunk space than the Renault Clio. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Clio (by 5 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 0.7 metres less than that of the Renault Clio, which means Volkswagen Polo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`640 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Volkswagen Polo has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Clio has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Volkswagen Polo, so Volkswagen Polo quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 6.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Renault Clio has
| |