HomeArticlesProductsKeywordsCompanies

Compare Renault Clio 4 Wagon facelift vs Skoda Fabia 3 Combi facelift vs Renault Clio 4 Estate

Variants
0.9 TCe 90
0.9 TCe 75
1.2 75
1.5 dCi 75
1.5 dCi 90
1.0 MPI 60PS
1.0 MPI 75PS
1.0 TSI 110PS
1.0 TSI 110PS DSG
1.0 TSI 95PS
1.0 TSI 95PS DSG
0.9 Energy TCe
1.2
1.2 TCe AT
1.5 dCi
1.5 dCi AT
1.5 Energy dCi

Capacity

Cargo Capacity
530 L / 18.7 cu-ft ~ 1395 L / 49.3 cu-ft
Coolant Capacity
5.0 L / 5.3 qt
5.0 L / 5.3 qt
Fuel Capacity
45.0 L / 11.9 gal
45.0 L / 11.9 gal
45.0 L / 11.9 gal
Passengers
5
5
5

Chassis

Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Drum
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
Semi-independent
Semi-independent
Semi-independent
Tire Size
215/45 R16
Turning Circle
11.0 m / 36.1 ft
10.6 m / 34.8 ft

Construction

Body Style
5-door Station Wagon
5-door Station Wagon
5-door Station Wagon

Dimensions

Ground Clearance
120 mm / 4.7 in
135 mm / 5.3 in
Size | Height
1475 mm / 58.1 in
1467 mm / 57.8 in
1445 mm / 56.9 in
Size | Length
4267 mm / 168.0 in
4262 mm / 167.8 in
4267 mm / 168.0 in
Size | Width
1732 mm / 68.2 in | 1945 mm / 76.6 in (mirror unfolded)
1732 mm / 68.2 in
1732 mm / 68.2 in
Track Width | Front
1506.0 mm / 59.3 in
Track Width | Rear
1506.0 mm / 59.3 in
Wheel Size
7, 0J x 16
Wheelbase
2589 mm / 101.9 in
2470 mm / 97.2 in
2589 mm / 101.9 in

Powertrain

Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 6
Euro 5
Engine | Bore
72.2 mm / 2.8 in
74.5 mm / 2.9 in
Engine | Displacement
1.0 L / 61.0 cu-in / 999.0 cc
Engine | Stroke
73.1 mm / 2.9 in
76.4 mm / 3.0 in
Transmission | Gears
5-speed
Transmission | Type
Manual

Production

Availability
2013 ~ 2016

Reviews

Neofiliac score
12%
4%
4%
Pros
  • Low fuel consumption
  • Decent engine reliability
  • Small turning circle
  • Low official fuel consumption
Cons
  • Horrible performance
  • Ugly
  • Miserably low engine output
  • Only available with tiny engines
  • Horrible 0-100kph time
  • Can't even reach 200km/h
  • Miserably low engine output
  • Only available with tiny engines
  • Stuck with semi-independent suspensions
  • Horrible 0-100kph time
  • Can't even reach 200km/h
  • Miserably low engine output
  • Only available with tiny engines
  • Not even fully independent suspensions

Price

Offers (incl. referral links)
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.