1965 Abarth OT vs. 1990 Renault Clio
To start off, 1990 Renault Clio is newer by 25 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1965 Abarth OT. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1965 Abarth OT would be higher. At 1,721 cc (4 cylinders), 1990 Renault Clio is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1990 Renault Clio (91 HP) has 27 more horse power than 1965 Abarth OT. (64 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1990 Renault Clio should accelerate faster than 1965 Abarth OT. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1990 Renault Clio weights approximately 225 kg more than 1965 Abarth OT. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 1965 Abarth OT is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 1965 Abarth OT. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1990 Renault Clio, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control.
Compare all specifications:
| 1965 Abarth OT | 1990 Renault Clio | |
| Make | Abarth | Renault |
| Model | OT | Clio |
| Year Released | 1965 | 1990 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Rear | Front |
| Engine Size | 981 cc | 1721 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 64 HP | 91 HP |
| Engine Bore Size | 65 mm | 82.7 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 74 mm | 83.5 mm |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 680 kg | 905 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3790 mm | 3710 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1510 mm | 1630 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1230 mm | 1400 mm |
