Renault Clio II Hatchback 1.1 58HP manual vs Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback 1.0 45HP manual

Renault Clio II Hatchback 1.1 58HP manual

Source: wikipedia.org M 93 Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Germany

18 reasons for

Renault Clio II Hatchback, model available from 1998 to 2010.
It has 1.1 58HP petrol engine produced from 1998 to 2010.
Drive on the front axle has manual, 5 speed gearbox.

5 reasons for

Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback, model available from 1994 to 2001.
It has 1.0 45HP petrol engine produced from 1994 to 1996.
Drive on the front axle has manual, 5 speed gearbox.

Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback 1.0 45HP manual
Renault

18 reasons for Renault Clio II Hatchback 1.1 58KM manual in comparison to Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback 1.0 45HP manual

Reasons for
135

Maximal power

58 > 45 hp
The Renault Clio II comes with petrol which makes by 13 more horsepower than the the engine of the Volkswagen Polo III, giving the vehicle a more dynamic character. It seems to be better car for drivers who want to feel thrill of drive a sports car.
50

Acceleration 0-100 km/h

15 > 21.4 s
If a swift driving is what you are really in to, the Renault Clio II Hatchback 1.1 58HP manual fits you better as it’s acceleration from 0 to 100 Km/h is 30 % faster than the Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback.
38

Trunk capacity

255 > 243 l
The boot of the Renault Clio II is only 12 l bigger than the Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback. However, the difference is so little that it would be right to say that both cars have more of less the same boot space.
33

Trunk capacity with seats down

1,035 > 977 l
33

Top speed

160 > 145 km/h
The top speed possible to be reached by the ​​Renault is greater compared with of the Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback by 15 km/h, which allows the Renault Clio II Hatchback to overcome faster large distance of highway. The difference at the level of 10 percent is little and will be negligible in everyday driving.
22

Width

1,636 > 1,632 mm
Distance between two sides of a car directly affects room in the cabin as well as stability on road. The Renault Clio II is widther only by 4 millimeters in relation to the Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback and is not really worth considering. The medium for the „supermini” segment equals to around 1,645 millimeters and is by 9 millimeters bigger than the width of the Renault Clio II Hatchback 1.1 58HP manual.
19

Fuel tank

49 > 45 l
The winner of selected cars in the category of fuel tank capacity is Renault Clio II Hatchback 1.1 58HP manual that is able to hold by 9 percent more fuel in relation to the Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback.
15

Wheelbase

2,471 > 2,403 mm
The wheelbase of a car is the length separating its front and rear wheels. The wheelbase significantly affects the driving due to better vehicle's weight distribution. Renault Clio II Hatchback has 68 mm longer wheelbase distance than Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback 1.0 45HP manual. Wheelbase dimensions are important to the balance and steering. Hence, the mass of Renault Clio II Hatchback 1.1 58HP manual should be better distributed and driving should be smoother and safer.
8

Engine capacity

1,150 > 1,043 cc
The Renault Clio II Hatchback has 107 cc bigger engine capacity in comparison to the Volkswagen Polo III. For the reason that the difference is small, the Renault Clio II should accelerate only slightly faster, of course if other paramerters are does not play a role.
8

Maximum load capacity

540 > 520 kg
6

Length

3,768 > 3,743 mm
The Renault is 1 % longer in comparison to the Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback. The length of the vehicle is important in terms of driving comfort and room in the trunk. The Renault Clio II Hatchback preasumbly will be offering to it's passangers more room for legs. Aditionally the Renault Clio II Hatchback 1.1 58HP manual will be better driven ,however, the Volkswagen will be a bit easier to park because of shorter length .
1

Model release date

1998 > 1994
Because of the fact that the Volkswagen was unveiled only 4 years prior to the Renault Clio II Hatchback, the gap between technology used in both cars is not really huge, however, the Renault Clio II Hatchback may feature a bit more advanced solutions applied in it.
1

Tire width

165 > 155 mm
0

Payload

1,424 > 1,370 kg
0

End of model sale

2010 > 2001
0

Tire diameter

14 > 13 ″
0

Tire profile

65 > 70 %
0

Curb weight

880 > 857 kg

Volkswagen

5 reasons for Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback 1.0 45KM manual in comparison to Renault Clio II Hatchback 1.1 58HP manual

Reasons for
56

Urban consumption

6.9 > 7.9 l
The Volkswagen Polo III uses 13 percent less petrol in the city in relation to the Renault Clio II. The Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback, which comes from subcompact class, consumes 0.6 l fewer fuel. Keep in mind that average fuel consumption in the urban for the small cars class equals to 7.5 l, whereas the Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback 1.0 45HP manual consumes by 8 percent less fuel than the average.
12

Urban range

634 > 608 km
3

Number of doors

5 > 3
There’s no question that the five-door Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback is more convenient and if you regularly travel with more than one passenger then you should not have any doubts which one to choose. The strongest point of a five-door vehicle is that it’s not only easier for passengers to get into the rear seats but it’s also easier to put luggage and cargo into the car when the rear seats are folded down. However, three-door cars like the Renault Clio II very often look much cooler and for young drivers who don’t often have more than one passengers in the car the Renault may be better one.
1

Height

1,419 > 1,417 mm
If you are a tall man or you happen to carry in the trunk thinks of large dimensions, the Volkswagen, which is by 2 mm higher than the Renault Clio II, is appropriate option for you. However, these two vehicles do not differ much it the aspect of its height and it should not be much observable.
0

Maximal power RPM

5,200 > 5,250 revolutions/minute

Cars specifications

Renault Clio II Hatchback 1.1 58HP manual Volkswagen Polo III Hatchback 1.0 45HP manual
    Price range popular popular
    Model release date 1998 1994
    Facelifting no no
    Class B B
    Payload 1,424 kg 1,370 kg
By using this site, you agree to the storage and use of cookie files. OK