1992 Renault Clio Reviews - Page 2 of 6

1992 Renault Clio 1.8 16v from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2007
Most recent year of ownership2008
Engine and transmission 1.8 16v Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 5 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 5 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.8 / 10
Distance when acquired120000 miles
Most recent distance124000 miles
Previous carRenault 5

Summary:

Fast and fun

Faults:

Faulty starter motor.

Faulty alternator (not charging).

Clutch cable snapped.

Rear caliper piston seized.

Rear shock absorbers worn.

Steering column insecure.

Electrical problem with the rear lights.

General Comments:

The Clio 1.8 16v is a great car for young drivers who want good performance at a low price. In the group 12 insurance bracket and developing 137 bhp, the Clio will accelerate to 60mph in 6.7 seconds.

The normal Clio will never handle like a Williams, but is very comfortable, and has very excellent GT type seats, which hold you firmly in place.

The main problems with the Clio is the space to work on the engine. With a big 1.8 litre twin cam engine in a small hatchback, room to work is limited. Just like most early 90's french cars, the reliability is an issue, but if kept upon and mended when the faults occur, the Clio can be a trusted A to B car.

To conclude then, the Clio is a fast and exciting car, my Clio is high mileage and still feels at tight as a drum. For the insurance and even most 13, 14 or even group 15 cars, the Clio is capable of many upsets!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 15th January, 2008

16th Jan 2008, 03:46

How did you manage a 6.7 0-60 time? It's more like 8.5. The Civic Type R with 200bhp does it in 6.6.

29th Jan 2008, 05:10

The 6.7 second 0-60 was a typo, its 7.7.

1992 Renault Clio RN 1.3L from Egypt

Model year1992
Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2005
Most recent year of ownership2007
Engine and transmission 1.3L Manual
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 2 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 10 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.2 / 10
Distance when acquired150000 kilometres
Most recent distance183000 kilometres
Previous carRenault V.W passat

Summary:

Simple

Faults:

The spare parts are SO costly... and not stable enough in the road.

General Comments:

I love it, but really I paid around $1200 to repair the engine, and some other parts are so costly...

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 6th July, 2007

1992 Renault Clio Campus 1.2 from UK and Ireland

Model year1992
Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2006
Most recent year of ownership2006
Engine and transmission 1.2 Don't Know

Faults:

Hi,

My daughter has just been involved in an accident, which resulted in her hitting the windscreen with her head. She was front seat passenger, her boyfriend, who was driving was also thrown forward and his head struck hers, neither airbag deployed which would have saved the head injuries. The impact to the car was frontal.

Talking to other Clio owners, some have experienced problems with wiring under the seats, and in some cases Dealers have said this is quite a common fault. If a warning light does not come up on the dashboard, you are left of the opinion that everything is OK. The only time you will find out is when you need them.

Has anyone else got any knowledge of these type of problems. We consider ourselves very lucky as the injuries, although painful, are able to be treated and a full recovery is expected. Somebody else may not be so lucky.

I would appreciate help from owners who have any experience of similar faults.

Alan Mason.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 22nd June, 2006

26th Jun 2006, 03:11

You are right on principle about airbag function, however, airbags on this model and other cars of this period have to be replaced every 10 years (todays automobiles every 15 y). Your car is from 1992 and we are 14 years later...

1992 Renault Clio RT 1.4 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1992
Most recent year of ownership1999
Engine and transmission 1.4 petrol Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Dealer Service marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired0 miles
Most recent distance59000 miles
Previous carRenault 19

Summary:

Lived up to its name as Car of the Year

Faults:

Stereo became faulty at 9,000 miles and needed replacing at 19,000 miles.

Suspension fault developed at 25,000 miles.

Brake pads needed replacing at 13,000 miles and again at 38,000 miles.

Sunroof catch broke at 42,000 miles.

Head gasket blew at 53,000 miles.

General Comments:

Considering its age and relatively high mileage, the Clio was a reliable and solid car.

Its interior space and comfort were beyond belief for such a small car.

Ride and handling were both excellent.

Cost a reasonable £7,400 from new and held its value fairly well before retailing at £1,800 seven years later.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Don't Know

Review Date: 16th April, 2006

1992 Renault Clio 16 valve 1.8 petrol from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1998
Most recent year of ownership2000
Engine and transmission 1.8 petrol Manual
Performance marks 10 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 8 / 10
Dealer Service marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.8 / 10
Distance when acquired56000 miles
Most recent distance80000 miles
Previous carFiat Tipo

Summary:

The best handling small car of the 1990's

Faults:

Broke down three times during final 4 months of ownership.

Driver's side electric window motor failed at 69,000 miles.

Interior trim was flimsy and broke easily.

General Comments:

Generally reliable, but started to show its age towards the end.

The best handling and performing small car I have ever driven.

Paid £3,500 for it when it was six years old. Sold it two years later for £2,000.

Would have kept it even longer, but wanted something with a bit more space.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 26th December, 2005

Average review marks: 7.2 / 10, based on 33 reviews