1965 Abarth OT vs. 1999 Renault Clio
To start off, 1999 Renault Clio is newer by 34 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. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1999 Renault Clio weights approximately 255 kg more than 1965 Abarth OT.
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, 1999 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 | 1999 Renault Clio | |
| Make | Abarth | Renault |
| Model | OT | Clio |
| Year Released | 1965 | 1999 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Rear | Front |
| Horse Power | 64 HP | 0 HP |
| Top Speed | 175 km/hour | 181 km/hour |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 680 kg | 935 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3790 mm | 3780 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1510 mm | 1650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1230 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2030 mm | 2770 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 30 L | 50 L |
