1982 Austin Ambassador vs. 1996 Renault Clio

To start off, 1996 Renault Clio is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1982 Austin Ambassador. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1982 Austin Ambassador would be higher. At 3,000 cc (6 cylinders), 1996 Renault Clio is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Renault Clio (250 HP) has 159 more horse power than 1982 Austin Ambassador. (91 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Renault Clio should accelerate faster than 1982 Austin Ambassador. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Renault Clio weights approximately 435 kg more than 1982 Austin Ambassador. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 1996 Renault Clio 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 1996 Renault Clio. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1982 Austin Ambassador, 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. Let's talk about torque, 1996 Renault Clio (407 Nm) has 252 more torque (in Nm) than 1982 Austin Ambassador. (155 Nm). This means 1996 Renault Clio will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1982 Austin Ambassador.

Compare all specifications: