1998 Renault Clio vs. 2013 Toyota Matrix
To start off, 2013 Toyota Matrix is newer by 15 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1998 Renault Clio. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1998 Renault Clio would be higher. At 2,400 cc (4 cylinders), 2013 Toyota Matrix is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2013 Toyota Matrix (156 HP @ 6000 RPM) has 92 more horse power than 1998 Renault Clio. (64 HP @ 4500 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 2013 Toyota Matrix should accelerate faster than 1998 Renault Clio. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2013 Toyota Matrix weights approximately 600 kg more than 1998 Renault Clio. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Both vehicles are front wheel drive (FWD). Which offers better traction when its slippery than rear wheel drive vehicles. 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, 2013 Toyota Matrix (220 Nm @ 4000 RPM) has 102 more torque (in Nm) than 1998 Renault Clio. (118 Nm @ 2250 RPM). This means 2013 Toyota Matrix will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 1998 Renault Clio.
Compare all specifications:
| 1998 Renault Clio | 2013 Toyota Matrix | |
| Make | Renault | Toyota |
| Model | Clio | Matrix |
| Year Released | 1998 | 2013 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Hatchback |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 1783 cc | 2400 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 64 HP | 156 HP |
| Engine RPM | 4500 RPM | 6000 RPM |
| Torque | 118 Nm | 220 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 2250 RPM | 4000 RPM |
| Fuel Type | Diesel | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | 5-speed manual |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 880 kg | 1480 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3780 mm | 4365 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1650 mm | 1765 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1560 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2470 mm | 2600 mm |
| Fuel Consumption | 5.6 L/100km | 7.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 8.8 L/100km | 10.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 50 L | 50 L |
