Well, these are two pretty similar cars we have here! It's only details that could potentially make the difference. Considering they both belong to the city car segment and utilize the same 3-door hatchback body style and the front wheel drive system, it all comes up to the specific petrol engine choice they offer. The first one has a Renault-engineered powertrain under the hood, a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 75hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 94hp engine designed by Suzuki.

Both vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. Still, apart from the official crash test results there are other things we need to be aware of. Both vehicles belong to the city car segment, which is generally not a very good thing safety-wise, but that fact doesn't break the tie between the two cars. Furthermore, if we'd like to consider vehicle mass in this context too, which we definitely should, the French car offers a considerable difference of 15% more metal.

Reliability is not the best thing to consider on the make level, but it is worth mentioning that Suzuki does have a slight advantage, all the models observed together. These are the official statistics, while our visitors describe reliability of Renault with an average rating of 4.1, and models under the Suzuki badge with 4.5 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Clio as average reliability-wise, and Swift is more or less at the same level.That apart, owners of different cars powered by the same engine as the French car rank it on average as 4.4, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 5.0 out of 5.

Suzuki is undoubtly more agile, reaching 100km/h in 1.1 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 165 kilometers per hour, 2km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy the winner has to be the Japanese car, averaging around 4.9 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (58 mpg), in combined cycle. We can't ignore that 18% difference compared to the French car.

Suzuki appears just a bit more reliable, although the difference is truly marginal. The most important thing when deciding between any two vehicles should always be safety, both passive and active. In my opinion, everything taken into account, the French car offers significantly better overall protection, taking the lead here. From there things take a different direction, with Suzuki being considerably quicker, thus putting more smile on driver's face. To make things even better, it consumps less fuel! All together, there's not much more to say, in this case I wouldn't even consider anything but Suzuki. Anyway, that's the most objective conclusion I could've came up with and it's based solely on the information found on this website. Aspects such as design, practicality, brand value and driving experience are there for you to measure them out. Also, you could use the oportunity to find out which car, everything taken into account, would be the perfect choice for you in the eyes of the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.