Hi.
I'm looking to buy either a Renault Clio Dynamique or a Fiat Punto Sporting (both with 1.2 engines and registered in 2001).
Besides the Punto being faster, which is the better car between the two and why?
Do they handle well?
Are they both reliable?
What's the build quality like in these cars?
If anybody can give an insight in to what these cars are like to own/drive, I would really appreciate it!
Thanks!
|
Clio is smoother, more comfortable and generally feels a little more 'together' than the Punto. Punto is, as you say, a little faster and more spacious. Neither are the last word in reliability but neither are bad (just watch out for the Clio bonnet catch!). You may find the driving position better in the Punto - the Clio is slightly offset and difficult to adjust properly if you are over about 5'10".
Overall I would probably go for the Clio if space is not too important - its just that bit more refined (the 1.2 16v engine is a peach). Ultimately drive both and take your pick on the the basis of the drive and the condition/price of the model you're looking at. And don't be afraid of looking elsewhere - 1.2 zetec Fiesta or even a nicely looked after 1.1 Saxo (not an abused 'couldn't afford a VTR/VTS')
|
I had one of the first Punto Sportings of that shape ('00 V-reg). Looked very nice in Sprint Blue, a colour also seen on Fiat Coupes of the time.
Handling very sharp indeed - made up for the ultimately fairly modest poke by the fact that you could carry a lot more speed into corners, which was perhaps just as well, given that the (non-ABS) brakes were very poor - a feature of rather too many non-ABS Fiats of the period.
At the time I bought mine ABS was a £600 option (and one that I couldn't afford), but not long after it became standard kit (and quite rightly). If you're looking at an '01 model it will very probably have standard ABS, which greatly improves the braking performance.
Electric power steering "lacked feel" as the journalists say (compare with a contemporary Focus Zetec to see what I mean) but worked well. Clever feature with the "City" button - as well as determining the level of assistance, in non-city mode it sharpened the throttle response.
Engine very smooth and quiet, but with peak power of 80 bhp at 5,000 rpm it begged the question why the red line was set at 7,000. Oil consumption minimal.
Close-ratio 6-speed gearbox pretty smooth and had a 6th gear long enough for only 3,000 rpm at an indicated 70, with result that it was very economical - I managed 50 mpg brim to brim on long runs a couple of times.
Overall average was about 44 mpg, including a good few thrashings. By contrast, my current Panda 100HP 1.4 struggles to beat 40 mpg on a long run, driven very gently.
Loads of room inside, also - I'm 6' 6" and could get comfortable inside it without difficulty.
One advantage of the small engine was decently cheap insurance - definite plus for me as I was 23 when I first had it.
All in all, it was cracking little car - the only things I would have preferred would have been better brakes and a slightly bigger engine. Oh, and a left foot rest.
Another one for your try list - Fiesta Zetec S? Pretty well thought of at the time, it's a Ford so it will handle and 1.6 engine will give better poke than the Punto by some distance.
|
The Clio should be more reliable and will have a better NCAP safety score.
Though if you are talking about two specific cars it comes down to mileage, history, condition, number of owners and if a dealer/trader warranty offered and reputation of the trader.
|
Based on people I know who have owned them I would go with the Clio without a doubt. Renault seemed to make engines that don't blow their head gaskets and their gearboxes tend to last quite a bit longer than the FIATs.
I believe the Punto's make very reliable cars when new but they just seem to get too many problems as they age.
|
I wouldnt put a fag paper between the longterm reliability of either to be honest. I would go for the Fiat as I have friends and colleagues that have owned Renaults and have been appauling - particularly electrics, suspension and interiors that are made of tortilia wraps!!
My best mates Dad has an 02 punto 1.2 that he has driven from teesside to York (120 mile round trip) every day since new and its never let him down once. I would think that the bodywork of the Fiat will hold up better as they tend not to rust. Look at older Meganes, clios after 2000ish, Scenics of similar age and their wheel archs are covered in rot.
|
Renaults and have been appauling - particularly electrics suspension and interiors that are made of tortilia wraps!! >>
Tosh, Renault interiors are fine and the attention to detail is very good. The later Laguna II has a reputation for poor electrics though the Clio II has a good reputation for reliability, certainly ours has been almost impeccable unlike, for instance, a friend's troublesome Yaris.
Look at older Meganes clios after 2000ish Scenics of similar age and their wheel archs are covered in rot. >>
Again tosh I am afraid, mid 90's on Renaults are galvanised /and or have plastic panels and are well protected.
|
>>Again tosh I am afraid, mid 90's on Renaults are galvanised /and or have plastic panels and are well protected.
Galvanised or not they rot much later than mid 90s. Have a look at the rear arches of Scenic's etc.
Colleague at work has a Y plate with rusty wheel arches and a mate has an 02 Megane (last of old shape before the big bum) and again is starting to show signs of rust.
>>certainly ours has been almost impeccable unlike, for instance, a friend's troublesome Yaris.
Its good to hear, but I would bet there are more troublesome Renaults than there are Toyota's. We have had 8 years of reliable service out of a Rover 214 that has now done almost 150,000 miles - I wouldnt like to suggest that they are all reliable and would go on as long though!
|
|
|
|
Thank you all for sharing your views!
From what I gather, either would be a great car to own. However, in terms of reliability, the Clio is deemed to be more reliable mechanically, and the the Punto is possibly more reliable electronically. Both cars handle well, but the driving position in the Clio may not suit everybody. The Punto is slightly more roomy, but the Clio isn't exactly small for its class.
They both seem to outweigh each other. I still can't decide!
The Clio is the cheaper of the two to run, but I guess a test-drive of both will clinch the deal.
Thanks!
|
|
I had a Punto HGT for a short while but couldn't live with the hard suspension, I'm not sure if Sportings are the same. It was fine on main roads but on bumpy back lanes it was rattling my fillings out.
|
I had a Punto HGT for a short while but couldn't live with the hard suspension I'm not sure if Sportings are the same.
As far as I recall the suspension was the same (and yes, it was pretty hard) - the HGT did manage all-round disc brakes though.
|
|
|
|
