Compare two cars
Compare any two cars and get our Virtual Adviser™ opinion
Dimensons & Outlines
Check vehicle history
Engine
1.6 M16A MPFI VVT HP+
Performance (manual gearbox)
Performance (automatic gearbox)
Expenses
Virtual Adviser's™ opinion
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 130hp unit, while the other one gets its power and torque from a 4-cylinder, 16-valves 136hp engine designed by Suzuki.
SafetyBoth vehicles got tested by European New Car Assessment Programme (Euro NCAP), with the same number of safety stars gained in the process. That aside, let's consider some other aspects which affect safety. Both vehicles belong to the city car segment, which is generally not a very good thing safety-wise, but it doesn't do much to help us decide between the two. Furthermore, when it comes to weight, a factor that most people underestimate, the French car offers a considerable difference of 10% more metal.
ReliabilityI don't like generalizing things when it comes to reliability, although it does seem that Suzuki does have a slight advantage, at least on all of the models level. These are the results of an independent reasearch, while our visitors describe reliability of Renault with an average rating of 4.2, and models under the Suzuki badge with 4.6 out of 5. Independent research findings rank Clio as average reliability-wise, and Swift is more or less at the same level.We should definitely mention that owners of cars with the same powertrain as the French car rank it on average as 3.0, while the one under the competitor's bonnet gets 4.5 out of 5.
Performance & Fuel economySuzuki is a bit more agile, reaching 100km/h in 0.6 seconds less than its competitor. Still, it lacks the power to win the top speed competition, topping at 195 kilometers per hour, 2km/h less than the other car. When it comes to fuel economy things look pretty much the same for both cars, averaging around 6.7 liters of fuel per 100 kilometers (42 mpg), in combined cycle.
Verdict
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. When it comes to performance, both vehicles provide similar experience, so I wouldn't point any of them out. the Japanese car still consumps less fuel, which needs to be taken into consideration. It's really tough to make a final decision here, but if I'd need to, I'd say Suzuki. In any case that's my personal view, built upon all the data available to me. What should decide here though is the way you feel about the two vehicles, and I hope you'll find my guidelines useful in the process. In case you have two minutes to spare I invite you to define your needs, desires and budget and see which car would be chosen by the virtual adviser™, among thousands of similar, yet so different vehicles.