Car comparison

Skoda Octavia II · Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSIvsRenault Clio III (PHASE II) RS 2.0 16V

Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.

New comparison

Skoda Octavia II · Facelift 2009

RS 2.0 TSI

200 hp1984 ccGasolineFWDAutomaticTurbochargedHatchback2009-2013
VS

Renault Clio III (PHASE II)

RS 2.0 16V

201 hp1998 ccGasolineFWDManualNaturally aspiratedHatchback2010-2012

Comparison overview

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Best choices

Skoda Octavia II Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSI

  • Fastest top speed
    238 km/h
    148 mph
  • Highest torque
    280 Nm
    207 lb-ft
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
    7.7 L/100 km
    30.5 mpg US
    36.7 mpg UK
  • Lowest city consumption
    10.4 L/100 km
    22.6 mpg US
    27.2 mpg UK
  • Lowest highway consumption
    6.2 L/100 km
    37.9 mpg US
    45.6 mpg UK
  • Best estimated range
    714 km
    444 mi
  • Largest trunk
    585 L
  • Best overall score
    61/100
  • Best performance score
    51/100
  • Best economy score
    86/100
  • Best practicality score
    82/100

Specification comparison

Specification comparison
ModelSkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSIRenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
Power
200hp149kW
201hp150kW
Torque
280Nm207lb-ft
215Nm159lb-ft
Curb weight
1,470kg3,241lb
1,204kg2,654lb
Gross weight
1,950kg4,299lb
1,690kg3,726lb
Top speed
238 km/h
148 mph
225 km/h
140 mph
To 99% top speed
87.9s99% target: 236 km/h / 146 mph
Calculated
73.8s99% target: 223 km/h / 138 mph
Calculated
0-100 km/h
7.5s
6.9s
0-200 km/h
30.4s
Calculated
31.5s
Calculated
0-60 mph
7.1s
Calculated
6.5s
Calculated
Fuel consumption
7.7L/100 km30.5mpg US36.7mpg UK
8.2L/100 km28.7mpg US34.4mpg UK
Fuel consumption city
10.4L/100 km22.6mpg US27.2mpg UK
11.2L/100 km21mpg US25.2mpg UK
Fuel consumption highway
6.2L/100 km37.9mpg US45.6mpg UK
6.5L/100 km36.2mpg US43.5mpg UK
Quarter mile
15.4s
Calculated
14.9s
Calculated
Power-to-weight
136hp/t101kW/t62hp/1000 lb
Calculated
167hp/t124kW/t76hp/1000 lb
Calculated
Torque-to-weight
190Nm/t127lb-ft/ton
Calculated
179Nm/t119lb-ft/ton
Calculated
Estimated range
714km444mi
Calculated
671km417mi
Calculated
Displacement
1,984cc121cu in
1,998cc122cu in
Length
4,569mm180in
4,017mm158in
Width
1,769mm70in
1,769mm70in
Height
1,462mm58in
1,484mm58in
Wheelbase
2,578mm101in
2,585mm102in
Front track
1,541mm61in
1,520mm60in
Rear track
1,514mm60in
1,520mm60in
Ground clearance-
120mm5in
Trunk volume
585L
288L
Max trunk volume
1,455L
1,038L
Doors
5
3
Seats
5
4
Fuel tank
55L
55L

Performance charts

Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.

Dyno simulation

Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.

Skoda Octavia II Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSIRenault Clio III (PHASE II) RS 2.0 16VPowerTorque
  • Skoda Octavia II Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSI: Power / Torque
  • Renault Clio III (PHASE II) RS 2.0 16V: Power / Torque
Dyno simulation data table
VehiclePeak power RPMPeak torque RPMMax engine speed
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI5,100 rpm1,800 rpm5,350 rpm
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V7,100 rpm5,400 rpm7,350 rpm

Acceleration curve

Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.

Acceleration and drag-race table
MetricSkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSIRenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
Acceleration checkpoints
0-60 mph
0-97 km/h
7.1 s
6.5 s
0-100 km/h
0-62 mph
7.5 s
6.9 s
0-200 km/h
0-124 mph
30.4 s
31.5 s
Top speed
238 km/h
148 mph
225 km/h
140 mph
Drag race simulation
60 ft
18 m
2.6 s
2.5 s
330 ft
101 m
6.7 s
6.5 s
1/8 mile
201 m
10.1 s
9.8 s
1000 ft
305 m
13.0 s
12.6 s
1/4 mile
402 m
15.4 s
14.9 s
Trap speed
1/4 mile
402 m
152 km/h
94 mph
154 km/h
96 mph

Power comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
200 hp
149 kW
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
201 hp
150 kW

Renault Clio III (PHASE II) RS 2.0 16V has 1 hp more than Skoda Octavia II Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSI.

The biggest power difference is between Skoda Octavia II Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSI and Renault Clio III (PHASE II) RS 2.0 16V: 1 hp (1 kW).

Torque comparison

Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
280 Nm
207 lb-ft
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
215 Nm
159 lb-ft

Curb weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
1,470 kg
3,241 lb
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
1,204 kg
2,654 lb

Top speed without limiter comparison

Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
238 km/h
148 mph
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
225 km/h
140 mph

0-100 km/h comparison

Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI7.5 s
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V6.9 s

The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Renault Clio III (PHASE II) RS 2.0 16V and Skoda Octavia II Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSI: 0.6 s.

Fuel consumption comparison

Bar comparison chart for Fuel consumption. Lower is better · L/100 km / mpg US / mpg UK

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
7.7 L/100 km
30.5 mpg US
36.7 mpg UK
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
8.2 L/100 km
28.7 mpg US
34.4 mpg UK

Power-to-weight comparison

Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
136 hp/t
101 kW/t
7.3 kg/hp
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
167 hp/t
124 kW/t
6.0 kg/hp

Estimated range comparison

Bar comparison chart for Estimated range. Higher is better · km / mi

Chart data table
VehicleValue
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
714 km
444 mi
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
671 km
417 mi

Performance spider chart

Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.

Chart data table
VehiclePowerAccelerationTop speed
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
200 hp
149 kW
7.5 s
238 km/h
148 mph
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
201 hp
150 kW
6.9 s
225 km/h
140 mph

Most attractive quadrant

Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.

Chart data table
VehiclePerformance scorePracticality score
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
Power
200 hp
149 kW
0-100 km/h7.5 s
Top speed
238 km/h
148 mph
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
585 L
20.7 cu ft
Length
4,569 mm
179.9 in
Height
1,462 mm
57.6 in
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
Power
201 hp
150 kW
0-100 km/h6.9 s
Top speed
225 km/h
140 mph
Doors/seats
3 doors
4 seats
Trunk
288 L
10.2 cu ft
Length
4,017 mm
158.1 in
Height
1,484 mm
58.4 in

Performance vs fuel economy

Cars closer to the top-right corner combine stronger performance with better fuel economy scores.

Performance vs fuel economy data table
VehiclePerformance scoreFuel economy score
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
Power
200 hp
149 kW
0-100 km/h7.5 s
Top speed
238 km/h
148 mph
7.7 L/100 km
30.5 mpg US
36.7 mpg UK
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
Power
201 hp
150 kW
0-100 km/h6.9 s
Top speed
225 km/h
140 mph
8.2 L/100 km
28.7 mpg US
34.4 mpg UK

Skoda Octavia II Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSI is closest to the top-right balance target for performance and fuel economy.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption

Cars closer to the lower-left corner offer a better mix of quick acceleration and low fuel consumption.

Acceleration vs fuel consumption data table
VehicleFuel consumption, L/100 km0-100 km/h, s
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
7.7 L/100 km
30.5 mpg US
36.7 mpg UK
7.5 s
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
8.2 L/100 km
28.7 mpg US
34.4 mpg UK
6.9 s

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption

The shaded area favors higher power-to-weight with lower combined fuel consumption.

Power-to-weight vs fuel consumption data table
VehiclePower-to-weight, hp/tFuel consumption, L/100 km
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSI
136 hp/t
101 kW/t
7.4 kg/hp
7.7 L/100 km
30.5 mpg US
36.7 mpg UK
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
167 hp/t
124 kW/t
6.0 kg/hp
8.2 L/100 km
28.7 mpg US
34.4 mpg UK

Detailed score breakdown

Detailed score breakdown
VehicleSkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSIRenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16V
Power
200 hp
149 kW
201 hp
150 kW
Torque
280 Nm
207 lb-ft
215 Nm
159 lb-ft
Acceleration
7.5 s
6.9 s
Top speed
238 km/h
148 mph
225 km/h
140 mph
Lightness
1,470 kg
3,241 lb
1,204 kg
2,654 lb
Fuel consumption
7.7 L/100 km
30.5 mpg US
36.7 mpg UK
8.2 L/100 km
28.7 mpg US
34.4 mpg UK
Practicality
Doors/seats
5 doors
5 seats
Trunk
585 L
20.7 cu ft
Length
4,569 mm
179.9 in
Height
1,462 mm
57.6 in
Doors/seats
3 doors
4 seats
Trunk
288 L
10.2 cu ft
Length
4,017 mm
158.1 in
Height
1,484 mm
58.4 in
Range score
714 km
444 mi
671 km
417 mi
Trunk score
585 L
20.7 cu ft
288 L
10.2 cu ft
Power-to-weight score
136 hp/t
101 kW/t
7.4 kg/hp
167 hp/t
124 kW/t
6.0 kg/hp
Overall
Fixed score
Fixed score

Fuel cost and annual usage

Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.

Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.

LC = Local Currency

Fuel cost and annual usage
VehicleSkoda Octavia II Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSIRenault Clio III (PHASE II) RS 2.0 16V
Consumption7.7 L/100 km30.5 mpg US36.7 mpg UK8.2 L/100 km28.7 mpg US34.4 mpg UK
Cost / 100 km13.48 LC100 km14.35 LC100 km
Cost / 100 mi21.69 LC100 mi23.09 LC100 mi
Annual fuel used1,155 L305 US gal254 UK gal1,230 L325 US gal271 UK gal
Annual fuel cost2,021 LC/year2,153 LC/year

Head-to-head comparisons

Skoda Octavia II Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSI

  • Has 65 Nm more
  • Has 13 km/h (8 mph) higher top speed
  • Uses 0.5 L/100 km less fuel
  • Has 44 km (27 mi) more estimated range
  • Has 297 L more trunk volume

Pros

  • Highest top speed
  • Highest torque
  • Lowest combined fuel consumption
  • Best estimated range
  • Largest trunk

Cons

  • Slowest 0-100 km/h
  • Lowest power
  • Heaviest

Renault Clio III (PHASE II) RS 2.0 16V

  • Has 1 hp more
  • Is 266 kg lighter
  • Is 0.6 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
  • Has 31 hp/t better power-to-weight

Pros

  • Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
  • Most powerful
  • Lightest
  • Best power-to-weight ratio

Cons

  • Highest combined fuel consumption
  • Lowest top speed
  • Smallest trunk

Choose cars to compare

Brand
Model
Generation
Engine or modification
Skoda Octavia II RS 2.0 TSI
Renault Clio III (PHASE II) RS 2.0 16V
Compare selected cars
2 vehicles selected

Popular comparisons

RS 2.0 TSI
2.0 TFSI
VS
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSIvsAUDIA3 Sportback (8PA)Facelift 20082.0 TFSI
RS 2.0 16V
RS 2.0 16V
VS
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16VvsRenaultClio III (PHASE I)RS 2.0 16V
RS 2.0 TSI
1.8 Di T-Jet 16V
VS
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSIvsLanciaDelta III (844)1.8 Di T-Jet 16V
RS 2.0 16V
2.0 16V Sport
VS
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16VvsRenaultClio II (PHASE III)2.0 16V Sport
RS 2.0 TSI
2.0 TFSI
VS
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSIvsAUDIA3 (8P)Facelift 20082.0 TFSI
RS 2.0 16V
3.0 V6
VS
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16VvsRenaultClio Sport (PHASE I)3.0 V6
RS 2.0 TSI
2.0 TFSI
VS
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSIvsVolkswagenBeetle (A5)2.0 TFSI
RS 2.0 16V
3.0i V6 24V
VS
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16VvsRenaultClio Sport (PHASE II)3.0i V6 24V
RS 2.0 TSI
1.8 Di T-Jet 16V
VS
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSIvsLanciaDelta III (844)Facelift 20111.8 Di T-Jet 16V
RS 2.0 16V
GT 2.0 TCe
VS
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16VvsRenaultMegane IIIGT 2.0 TCe
RS 2.0 TSI
FR 2.0 TFSI
VS
SkodaOctavia IIFacelift 2009RS 2.0 TSIvsSeatLeon II (1P)Facelift 2009FR 2.0 TFSI
RS 2.0 16V
GT 2.0 TCe
VS
RenaultClio III (PHASE II)RS 2.0 16VvsRenaultMegane III (PHASE II)GT 2.0 TCe
Skoda Octavia II · Facelift 2009 RS 2.0 TSI vs Renault Clio III (PHASE II) RS 2.0 16V - car comparison - FastVsFaster