2005 Renault Clio vs. 2009 Tata Nano
To start off, 2009 Tata Nano is newer by 4 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2005 Renault Clio. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2005 Renault Clio would be higher. At 1,149 cc (4 cylinders), 2005 Renault Clio is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2005 Renault Clio (74 HP) has 39 more horse power than 2009 Tata Nano. (35 HP). In normal driving conditions, 2005 Renault Clio should accelerate faster than 2009 Tata Nano. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2005 Renault Clio weights approximately 490 kg more than 2009 Tata Nano. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2009 Tata Nano 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 2009 Tata Nano. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2005 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. Let's talk about torque, 2005 Renault Clio (105 Nm @ 4250 RPM) has 57 more torque (in Nm) than 2009 Tata Nano. (48 Nm @ 3000 RPM). This means 2005 Renault Clio will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2009 Tata Nano. 2005 Renault Clio has automatic transmission and 2009 Tata Nano has manual transmission. 2009 Tata Nano will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2005 Renault Clio will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
2005 Renault Clio | 2009 Tata Nano | |
Make | Renault | Tata |
Model | Clio | Nano |
Year Released | 2005 | 2009 |
Body Type | Hatchback | Hatchback |
Engine Position | Front | Rear |
Engine Size | 1149 cc | 624 cc |
Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 2 cylinders |
Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 2 valves |
Horse Power | 74 HP | 35 HP |
Torque | 105 Nm | 48 Nm |
Torque RPM | 4250 RPM | 3000 RPM |
Engine Compression Ratio | 10.6:1 | 9.5:1 |
Drive Type | Front | Rear |
Transmission Type | Automatic | Manual |
Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
Number of Doors | 3 doors | 4 doors |
Vehicle Weight | 1090 kg | 600 kg |
Vehicle Length | 3990 mm | 3099 mm |
Vehicle Width | 1710 mm | 1495 mm |
Vehicle Height | 1500 mm | 1652 mm |
Wheelbase Size | 2690 mm | 2230 mm |
Fuel Consumption Overall | 5.6 L/100km | 4.2 L/100km |
Fuel Tank Capacity | 55 L | 37 L |