2005 Renault Clio vs. 1996 Rover 200
To start off, 2005 Renault Clio is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Rover 200. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Rover 200 would be higher. At 1,994 cc (4 cylinders), 1996 Rover 200 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Rover 200 (85 HP @ 4500 RPM) has 11 more horse power than 2005 Renault Clio. (74 HP @ 6000 RPM) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Rover 200 should accelerate faster than 2005 Renault Clio. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Renault Clio weights approximately 5 kg more than 1996 Rover 200.
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, 1996 Rover 200 (170 Nm @ 2000 RPM) has 69 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 Renault Clio. (101 Nm @ 4250 RPM). This means 1996 Rover 200 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 Renault Clio.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Renault Clio | 1996 Rover 200 | |
Make | Renault | Rover |
Model | Clio | 200 |
Year Released | 2005 | 1996 |
Engine Position | Front | Front |
Engine Size | 1598 cc | 1994 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 85 HP |
Engine RPM | 6000 RPM | 4500 RPM |
Torque | 101 Nm | 170 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 2000 RPM |
Drive Type | Front | Front |
Transmission Type | Manual | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 5 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 5 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1140 kg | 1135 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 3980 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1700 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1500 mm | 1430 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2570 mm | 2510 mm |