1998 Mercedes-Benz SL vs. 1999 Renault Clio
To start off, 1999 Renault Clio is newer by 1 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 Mercedes-Benz SL. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 Mercedes-Benz SL would be higher. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1998 Mercedes-Benz SL weights approximately 955 kg more than 1999 Renault Clio.
Because 1998 Mercedes-Benz SL 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 1998 Mercedes-Benz SL. 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:
| 1998 Mercedes-Benz SL | 1999 Renault Clio | |
| Make | Mercedes-Benz | Renault |
| Model | SL | Clio |
| Year Released | 1998 | 1999 |
| Body Type | Convertible | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Horse Power | 302 HP | 0 HP |
| Top Speed | 250 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 | 1890 kg | 935 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4510 mm | 3780 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1820 mm | 1650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1300 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2520 mm | 2770 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 9.6 L/100km | 5.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 17.9 L/100km | 9.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 12.7 L/100km | 7.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 80 L | 50 L |
