1999 Renault Clio Reviews - Page 4 of 6

1999 Renault Clio RN 1.2 from UK and Ireland

Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership2002
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 1.2 Manual
Performance marks 7 / 10
Reliability marks 6 / 10
Comfort marks 6 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 9 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
7.0 / 10
Distance when acquired19400 miles
Most recent distance20650 miles

Summary:

On the whole it's a great little car!

Faults:

Very little, just the changing of some bulbs.

Twitchy remote central locking, is a little un nerving, you have to check that its locked properly.

General Comments:

I bought it from a local auction house, so couldn't check the car out thoroughly beforehand, I found that despite it being mistreated by its previous owners, and having missed its first service, it was mechanically perfect, it starts first time every time, and has yet to give me any problems.

Performance is good, nippy round town. OK on the motorways.

When driven sensibly it can achieve 45 mpg.

It tends to roll around a lot at speed, but that's quite acceptable considering what its been designed for.

Cheap insurance is also a plus.

I recently did nearly 500 miles on the motorways and found it was OK, my back ached a bit at the end, but on the whole it was fine.

Speaking to some "in car audio experts" I found that the front speakers are quite good and don't need upgrading, even when I upgraded the Head unit (radio cassette to radio CD/MP3).

My dad drives a Volvo estate, and commented that "It has a big car feel to it".

On the whole it's a great little car!

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? Yes

Review Date: 1st October, 2002

1999 Renault Clio RT 1.4 from Singapore

Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 1.4 Manual
Performance marks 8 / 10
Reliability marks 4 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 5 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
5.6 / 10
Distance when acquired0 kilometres
Most recent distance29000 kilometres
Previous carAudi A4

Summary:

A lemon

Faults:

Immediately after the warranty ran out, the main crankshaft oil seal needed replacing and also the timing belt as a result.

The CV boots were replaced.

The a/c evaporator coil needs replacing.

Battery barely made 22,000 kms.

Some electrical problem made it impossible to start.

General Comments:

Nice little car with a comfortable ride, but mechanical reliability is pathetic.

Would you buy another car from this manufacturer? No

Review Date: 27th August, 2002

1999 Renault Clio RT 1.9 diesel from Belgium

Year of manufacture1999
First year of ownership1999
Most recent year of ownership2002
Engine and transmission 1.9 diesel Manual
Performance marks 5 / 10
Reliability marks 7 / 10
Comfort marks 7 / 10
Dealer Service marks 9 / 10
Running Costs (higher is cheaper) 4 / 10
Overall marks (average of all marks)
6.4 / 10
Distance when acquired0 kilometres
Most recent distance165200 kilometres
Previous carRenault 11

Summary:

I'll keep driving it until it drops, maybe two more years

Faults:

The fuel injection pump died. On a diesel, this is an expensive replacement and I was out just over $1,000.00. Of course this was only 9,000 KM after the warranty expired. Renault did pay part of the replacement. At about 145,000 KM the transmission quit. I replaced it with a second hand unit. This was another $650.00. The biggest fault was Renault didn't have a turbo diesel in this car when it was launched in 1998. There had been a turbo version of the 1.9 engine out since 1992 when it was introduced in the R19, so there was no excuse not to have it in the new Clio.

General Comments:

Overall it's not a bad car. I'm still on the original shocks and struts, rear brakes, exhaust, and battery. The front brakes lasted to 135,000 KM. The seats are rather harder that I expected from Renault, so lower marks for comfort. I put a set of Continental Premium Contact tires on mine and they made a fantastic difference in how the car handled. I used 185/60 R 14 on the optional Stella wheels. The styling is not a strong point with this car and the Clio 2.5 is even worse. Still, not bad considering the beating I give it of over 33,000 KM each year.

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

Review Date: 6th May, 2002

18th Dec 2003, 16:24

I wrote this review originally. The car now has 252 513 Km. I've had to replace quite a few things recently such as the entire exhaust (nearly €1 000/$1200, too much!), the brakes, ball joints, wheel bearings,... Given the Km's I do, this was not unexpected. Incidently, I do about 55 000 Km's each year, the 33 000 figure in my original report is for miles. Sorry for the error.

I have always used a full synthetic motor oil since the first oil change. I change every 15 000 Km as Renault recommends. I've been using Mobil 1 0W-30 for the past two years with excellent results, it's better than the 5W-30 even though Renault does not recommend this grade for its diesels of that year. I have to add about one half liter of oil between changes. The engine purrs like a kitten and starts easily, even in minus 12 C temperatures, but that's at the cost of a new set of glow plugs each year. The car has always been maintained by Renault. I give it a minute or two to idle in cold temperatures before driving and go gently until the temperature needle is in the normal range.

From time to time the car gets overloaded. The worst incident of this was when our supermarket put 18 kilo sacks of dog food on half price sale. I got all they had--24 sacks--and managed to get them all in the car and had enough space left over for myself. I had to drive it like that for about two hours before it could be unloaded. It was no worse for wear afterwards. I'm still on the original shock absorbers/struts, drive shafts, starter, and alternator.

The car is a good driver. Oddly enough, one of its best features is the 50 liter fuel tank, largest in class. You may think that's strange, but the larger the tank, the fewer times you have to stop and fill it. When you do over 50 000 Km's every year, the savings in time add up.

I'm now running on Continental EcoContact 3 tires. For an entry level tire, they are fantastic, better than the Semperit Speed Comforts they replaced.

Given the Km's I've done up to now, I see no reason not to get at least 300 000 Km's and hopefully a little more as I don't expect to buy another new car until mid-2005. Unless something much better comes along, that new car will be a Ford C-Max.

16th Sep 2005, 08:37

OK, I'm back again. I sold the car a while ago with over 324000 Km/201000 miles on it. She still had the four original shocks, both driveshafts, starter, and alternator. It took me 10 days short of six years to roll up that distance, so a lot of hours on that hard driver's seat. It still fired right up at the first turn of the key and there was no oil consumption to speak of. I can't say I didn't get my money's worth out of it. My new car is a 2005 Fiat Idea 1.9 JTD Emotion as the C-Max was too expensive. I'm glad I took the topline RT version rather than any of the others. If you're going to spend that much time in a car, it needs to be as nice as possible.

Average review marks: 7.2 / 10, based on 22 reviews