1992 Renault Clio Reviews - Page 4 of 6

1992 Renault Clio RN 1.2 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1994
Most recent year of ownership2004
Engine and transmission 1.2 Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 4 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.4 / 10
Distance when acquired8000 miles
Most recent distance66000 miles
Previous carRover - Austin Metro

Summary:

A reliable, comfortable and practical car, but not exciting

Faults:

Front wheel bearings both replaced twice at around 20,000 and 35,000 miles.

The multi-plug for the blower melted recently.

The clutch cable snapped at around 40,000 miles.

Other than the above, has proved very economical to service and maintain.

General Comments:

Its very comfortable for its size and copes extremely well on long motorway journeys.

Always starts first time and handles very well in difficult weather conditions.

The 1.2 engine does struggle a bit on steep climbs when the car is well loaded.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 12th July, 2004

1992 Renault Clio RL 1.2 from France

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1993
Most recent year of ownership2000
Engine and transmission 1.2 Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.2 / 10
Distance when acquired20000 kilometres
Most recent distance130000 kilometres
Previous carRenault 5

Summary:

Cheap, Solid and cool

Faults:

Did 80K km with it and all was fine. Then, ball bearings, Head Gasket (120000), exhaust... all fell apart at the same time. Costly for a student.

General Comments:

Excellent car for youngsters, easy to drive in cities and even for long trips (I drove from Nice to Northern Scotland with it).

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 22nd May, 2004

1992 Renault Clio RL 1.9 D from Hungary

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership1997
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.9 D Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 8 / 10
Comfort marks 5 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.6 / 10
Distance when acquired87000 kilometres
Most recent distance247000 kilometres
Previous carPeugeot 505

Summary:

Cheap, but good, simple

Faults:

Weak points: Gearbox left side rubber gasket leaks oil. Front suspension parts worn quickly. Diesel fuel filter house leaked air. Timing belt tensioner rollers worn quickly. Seats are too soft. Trunk door leaks rain.

Good side: Some parts are still the original ones: Exhaust pipe, clutch cable, accelerator and hand brake cable, starter motor, electrics. The engine is the best. It is really a long lasting and dependable construction. The head was not dismounted yet. No oil consumption yet. Always started. The body stands well against corrosion.

General Comments:

A workhorse: small, enough power, economic use. No comfort, so nothing to get wrong. Ideal in town, good for everywhere else. Well handles in the corners. Especially since I changed the original 155/70 tires to 165/70. Well drives in snow. The speed range is limited, it does not like above 120.

I liked it so much. I just need a bit bigger car with some more comfort.

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

Review Date: 9th November, 2003

1992 Renault Clio RT 1.4 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2003
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.4 Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 8 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
8.0 / 10
Distance when acquired105351 miles
Most recent distance105600 miles
Previous carVauxhall Astra

Summary:

Economical, sporty looking hatch

Faults:

The Rocker cover gasket went, but had fixed no problems.

Small rust and little paint jobs around car and arches of car, had to be for age.

Fuel gage is slightly suspicious at time, it doesn't always read correct.

General Comments:

This is a good little car, I went from a 1.6 16v Astra sport to this and it is a lot quicker off the mark, but a little slower top end. It is really comfy inside and almost retro (good for a joy boy) it takes all 6 foot of me in comfort, with little space for the back seat passengers though! Handles like on tracks and drives very nicely, looks very good with 15" alloys fitted!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 28th February, 2003

1992 Renault Clio 16v 1.8 16v from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.8 16v Manual
Performance marks 9 / 10
Reliability marks 9 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 7 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.4 / 10
Distance when acquired112000 miles
Most recent distance120000 miles
Previous carRover - Austin 200

Summary:

Reps BMW's worst nightmare

Faults:

The gearbox blew.

Engine mounts went yesterday.

Side wall on drivers seat badly worn.

General Comments:

The 16v model is very very fast, in the last week I have seen off an MG ZT, BMW 325 and a Toyota Celica GT. As for cornering it is unreal, but does come up onto 3 wheels quite often. I love this car and will keep it for a long time.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 26th January, 2003

1992 Renault Clio RL 1.2 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1992
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2003
Engine and transmission 1.2 Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.5 / 10
Distance when acquired95000 miles
Most recent distance99000 miles
Previous carFord Fiesta

Summary:

An Excellent first car

Faults:

Firstly my Exhaust System corroded and fell apart including the Cat Converter within 200 miles of me owning the car.

Secondly, the Brakes have been replaced all round.

Thirdly, Shock Absorbers have been replaced all round.

Finally, the rear light has been faulty.

So I haven't experienced too many problems within the first 4000 miles of ownership.

General Comments:

On the whole this car has been a great runner, the problems that I have experienced are really expected with the age of the car.

The car handles well, even when swung into a corner.

This car really doesn't show its age, such a pretty car that was probably ahead of its time in respect of styling.

When buying a similar vehicle, I strongly recommend that a qualified Mechanic inspects the car, if the car has already had money spent on it then such vehicle is a real bargain for any second hand buyer.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 22nd January, 2003

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