1967 Abarth OT vs. 2004 Renault Clio
To start off, 2004 Renault Clio is newer by 37 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1967 Abarth OT. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1967 Abarth OT would be higher. At 1,946 cc (4 cylinders), 1967 Abarth OT is equipped with a bigger engine. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2004 Renault Clio weights approximately 280 kg more than 1967 Abarth OT.
Because 1967 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 1967 Abarth OT. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2004 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:
| 1967 Abarth OT | 2004 Renault Clio | |
| Make | Abarth | Renault |
| Model | OT | Clio |
| Year Released | 1967 | 2004 |
| Engine Position | Rear | Front |
| Engine Size | 1946 cc | 1598 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 106 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline - Premium |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 2 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 810 kg | 1090 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3580 mm | 3780 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1430 mm | 1650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1320 mm | 1420 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2030 mm | 2480 mm |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 60 L | 50 L |
