2000 Renault Clio vs. 2010 Smart ForTwo
To start off, 2010 Smart ForTwo is newer by 10 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2000 Renault Clio. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2000 Renault Clio would be higher. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2000 Renault Clio weights approximately 95 kg more than 2010 Smart ForTwo.
Because 2010 Smart ForTwo 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 2010 Smart ForTwo. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2000 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:
| 2000 Renault Clio | 2010 Smart ForTwo | |
| Make | Renault | Smart |
| Model | Clio | ForTwo |
| Year Released | 2000 | 2010 |
| Body Type | Hatchback | Convertible |
| Horse Power | 0 HP | 70 HP |
| Fuel Type | Gasoline | Gasoline |
| Drive Type | Front | Rear |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 2 seats |
| Number of Doors | 3 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 935 kg | 840 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 3780 mm | 2695 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1650 mm | 1560 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1430 mm | 1542 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2770 mm | 1867 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 5.8 L/100km | 5.7 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 9.6 L/100km | 7.1 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 50 L | 33 L |
