1996 Renault Clio vs. 2010 Holden Cruze
To start off, 2010 Holden Cruze is newer by 14 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Renault Clio. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Renault Clio 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 111 more horse power than 2010 Holden Cruze. (139 HP). In normal driving conditions, 1996 Renault Clio should accelerate faster than 2010 Holden Cruze.
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, 2010 Holden Cruze, 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 231 more torque (in Nm) than 2010 Holden Cruze. (176 Nm). This means 1996 Renault Clio will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2010 Holden Cruze.
Compare all specifications:
1996 Renault Clio | 2010 Holden Cruze | |
Make | Renault | Holden |
Model | Clio | Cruze |
Year Released | 1996 | 2010 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Sedan |
Engine Position | Middle | Front |
Engine Size | 3000 cc | 1796 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 6 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | V | in-line |
Horse Power | 250 HP | 139 HP |
Torque | 407 Nm | 176 Nm |
Drive Type | Rear | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
Vehicle Length | 3780 mm | 4597 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1640 mm | 1788 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1420 mm | 1477 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2490 mm | 2685 mm |