2005 Ford Mustang vs. 2000 Renault Clio
To start off, 2005 Ford Mustang is newer by 5 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. 2005 Ford Mustang weights approximately 562 kg more than 2000 Renault Clio.
Because 2005 Ford Mustang 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 2005 Ford Mustang. 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:
| 2005 Ford Mustang | 2000 Renault Clio | |
| Make | Ford | Renault |
| Model | Mustang | Clio |
| Year Released | 2005 | 2000 |
| Body Type | Coupe | Hatchback |
| Horse Power | 202 HP | 0 HP |
| Drive Type | Rear | Front |
| Number of Seats | 4 seats | 5 seats |
| Number of Doors | 2 doors | 3 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1497 kg | 935 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 4770 mm | 3780 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1890 mm | 1650 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1390 mm | 1430 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 2620 mm | 2770 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Highway | 8.4 L/100km | 5.8 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption City | 12.4 L/100km | 9.6 L/100km |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 10.7 L/100km | 7.2 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 61 L | 50 L |
