Renault Sandero vs Hyundai i20: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Renault · 2012–2020
Sandero II
- Power
- 83 kW113 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- -
- Top speed
- -
- Kerb mass
- -
Hyundai · 2020–present
i20 BC3
- Power
- 62 kW84 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- 13.1 s
- Top speed
- 173 km/h
- Kerb mass
- 1,088 kg
At a glance
Who suits what, worked out from the catalog figures of the versions above.
- Off-road Too close to call Drive and body: Front-wheel drive · Hatchback vs Front-wheel drive · Hatchback
In plain words
Renault Sandero has more power: 83 kW (113 PS) against 62 kW (84 PS) for Hyundai i20. Renault Sandero is the older design (from 2007); Hyundai i20 arrived in 2008. Our catalog has no 0–100 km/h for the Renault Sandero yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Full specifications
| Renault Sandero | Hyundai i20 | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | Sandero II · petrol · 83 kW (113 PS) | petrol · 62 kW (84 PS) |
| Production years | 2012–2020 | 2020–present |
| Body | Hatchback | Hatchback |
| Country | France | South Korea |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 83 kW (113 PS) 111 hp Better | 62 kW (84 PS) 83 hp |
| Power, all versions | 55–83 kW (75–113 PS) 74–111 hp | 62–88 kW (84–120 PS) 83–118 hp |
| Torque Why it matters: Torque is the pulling force you feel when accelerating from low revs, towing or climbing hills. | 152 Nm 112 lb-ft Better | 122 Nm 90 lb-ft |
| 0–100 km/h Why it matters: A shorter 0–100 km/h time means quicker getaways and safer merging onto fast roads. | No data | 13.1 s |
| Top speed Why it matters: Top speed hints at how relaxed the car is at motorway speeds, even if you never reach it. | No data | 173 km/h 107 mph |
| Power per tonne | No data | 57 kW/t 69 hp/ton calculated |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | Petrol | Petrol |
| Drive | Front-wheel drive | Front-wheel drive |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | No data | 4,040 mm 159.1 in |
| Width | No data | 1,775 mm 69.9 in |
| Height | No data | 1,450 mm 57.1 in |
| Wheelbase | No data | 2,580 mm 101.6 in |
| Kerb weight Why it matters: A lighter car is usually more agile and uses less energy. | No data | 1,088 kg 2,399 lb |
| Boot Why it matters: A bigger boot fits more luggage, shopping or a pram. | No data | 352 l 12.4 cu ft |
| Fuel tank Why it matters: A larger tank means more distance between fuel stops. | No data | 40 l 10.6 gal US |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | No data | 5.6 l/100 km 42.0 mpg US |
| CO₂ | No data | 127 g/km |
| Fuel cost per year | No data | €1,470/year estimated |
| Range on a full tank | No data | 714 km 444 mi estimated |
| Safety | ||
| Euro NCAP | No data | ★★★★☆ (2021) |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (3): Body, Fuel, Drive.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.75/l petrol.