1966 AC Cobra vs. 2000 Renault Clio
To start off, 2000 Renault Clio is newer by 34 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1966 AC Cobra. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1966 AC Cobra would be higher. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1966 AC Cobra weights approximately 212 kg more than 2000 Renault Clio.
Because 1966 AC Cobra 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 1966 AC Cobra. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 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:
| 1966 AC Cobra | 2000 Renault Clio | |
| Make | AC | Renault |
| Model | Cobra | Clio |
| Year Released | 1966 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Roadster | Hatchback |
| Horse Power | 410 HP | 0 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1147 kg | 935 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3970 mm | 3780 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1730 mm | 1650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1250 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2290 mm | 2770 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 68 L | 50 L |
