Small family car comparison test: Citroën C3, Ford Fiesta, Kia Rio, Nissan Micra, Renault Clio, Seat Ibiza, Suzuki Swift

The Polo was not yet available in the Slovenian market at the time of this comparison test, but as soon as he drove it, we sent him to the fight with Ibiza and Fiesta and thus finally determined the best in its class!

Not only is the Clio brand new among the seven, but of course that doesn't mean it's very old - and as you can read, it easily fights the youth. If you feel like you're missing one important competitor, make no mistake: the Volkswagen Polo is also brand new this year, so much so that it was only well represented during our test. It will still drive on our roads, so we haven't been able to get it tested yet - but we're already promising it'll have to compete against (at least) this year's comparison test winner upon arrival in our test. fleet.

Of course, we opted for petrol models (buying diesels in this class in most cases is pointless), and it is interesting that Kia was the only car with a naturally aspirated engine among those compared - all the rest had a three- or three-unit engine. Four-wheel drive under the hood. Four-cylinder supported by a turbocharger. Even more interesting: after the Kia, the Clio was actually the only one with a four-cylinder engine (because we couldn't get it with a weaker three-cylinder engine like the one found in the Micra).

In short, if a Kia importer could provide us with a slightly more powerful and modern three-cylinder turbo engine for the Rio, we could say that they were all equipped with state-of-the-art, state-of-the-art powertrains. Well, Rio had a well-known and proven 1,2-liter naturally aspirated four-cylinder engine that has been slightly updated for the current new generation of Rio, but is certainly the least powerful of those compared. Well, it did not lag behind the competition and in the race for fuel economy took exactly the middle place with 6,9 liters. It also did not show any major deviations in terms of performance, at least in terms of driving feel, and together with the almost equally strong Micro, it sits in the background in terms of measured values. A little, of course, also because, together with Ibiza, he must carry with him the maximum weight of the car.

In fact, the Micra was the least convincing in terms of drive, and besides having the smallest three-cylinder under the front cover, it also only offers a five-speed manual transmission. Despite the relatively light weight of the car, it is unconvincing even in terms of fuel consumption. Together with his "stepbrother" Clio, he stands out most of all for its high average consumption. The engine would also be numbered with the Fiesta, with a three-liter, three-cylinder engine producing just 100 horsepower. A more convincing shade is the Suzuki engine, which also has an electric assist (that's a 12-volt micro-hybrid) for the first few moments of acceleration, giving it maximum bounce at low speeds. Microhybrid technology indicates a direction that another manufacturer is likely to tackle soon.

First of all, the Swift proves to be a great fuel saver (since the shortest or smallest car in the lightest weight test is lighter), but the Ibiza still outperforms it by a deciliter, the Citroen showing itself with the third best mileage before the Fiesta. With a slightly different driving style, the Citroën C3 made its mark in our seven. The only one equipped with an automatic transmission was of course the second level in terms of driving comfort, the combination of a 1,2-liter three-cylinder engine (the largest in comparison) and a true automatic transmission will satisfy those who for one reason or another manual shift will not find - after all, such cars will spend a lot of time in the city, and there automation is a very convenient choice. In terms of average consumption, the C3 performed well compared to the competition.

However, our test is also proof that the days when automatic transmissions seemed very exotic are completely gone! The three-cylinder Ibiza and Clio engines share 200 cubic centimeters of displacement, but this advantage in favor of the Clio is only manifested in a slightly higher power output (a difference of 5 "horsepower"). Also, according to the driving experience, the driver can detect only minor differences, which is also confirmed by measurements. Clio "escapes" Ibiza a little with an acceleration of up to 100 kilometers per hour, but then Ibiza again catches up with him at the "racing" quarter mile (402 meters). However, the Clio leaves a slightly better impression in terms of performance, but unfortunately it fades a little at much higher average consumption.

All of the engine and propulsion observations mentioned above are more or less a hair-in-the-egg search—there are quite a few differences between the individual candidates we tested, and it's likely that few buyers will choose motion as the deciding factor.

It is very similar in terms of driving comfort and location on the road. Here we can look for more or less comfortable ones, but we also have to be careful when choosing individual brands, since some manufacturers already offer a choice of suspension in this class, and sometimes it seems that a less comfortable driving or a more sporty position depends heavily on the choice of wheels - those. tire and wheel sizes. Five of our seven candidates wore very similar shoes, 55-section tires on 16-inch rings; troika, Fiesta, Rio and Clio, even the dimensions are exactly the same. But here, too, we found out how much different shoes can affect a good impression (and, of course, safety and position on the road). The Clio was the only one in the much lower priced Motrio Conquest Sport tire category. We didn't feel anything sporty in the Clio, except for the sporty feel that we used to feel losing traction in corners. It's a pity! The Ibiza FR equipment also means stiffer suspension (like the Xperience), of course the wheels fit that size too. The Fiesta is also one of those candidates where we could be more satisfied with position and comfort, its position on the road was the most interesting. The Swift and Rio are sort of mid-range, the Micra is a little behind (perhaps also because of the completely unnecessary tire size). Here again, the Citroën is a class apart, more comfort-oriented, and indeed a true messenger of more "French" driving comfort.

The same is true of its form. The three-story front grille, two-tone body and "air dampers" on the sides are what ruin opinions aesthetically, but the fact is that the C3 is best prepared to fight on the city streets. Even the slightly higher seating position lets us know that its pits and curbs don't come to life easily. The last two models from the test seven clearly demonstrate the greatest design freshness. While the Fiesta has retained the distinctive nose shape, it has become a bit "serious" and appeals to customers more with elegance and sophistication rather than sportiness. It tries to break the restraint with a two-tone body tint, and while white doesn't really suit a busy city car, the test subject's gold roof is just the right thing to spice things up. Even Seat decided to continue the intended direction of the more daring ones in the Volkswagen Group. The Ibiza, especially with the FR version, runs the sportiest of the test seven. This is further enhanced by the aggressive daily LED signatures in the headlights, which also work with LED technology.

The Micra is Nissan's third attempt to evoke a pleasant and, above all, successful second generation of this model. The novelty works much more aggressively, with more sharp edges and sharp lines. In the Rio model, Kia is trying to catch up with European design principles, but does not want to stand out in any direction. Thus, there is some consistency in the car, but without details that would make the car more interesting. In contrast, the Suzuki Swift brings back to the rookie the character we once knew when Swifts were little sporty firecrackers. The wide rear end, the wheels pressed into the extreme edges and the dynamic coloring of the body speak of the sporty pedigree of this model. We are left with only the Clio, which is a design symbol for all current Renault models, but it looks like it is now its turn to be updated. 


In terms of design, we could re-write a similar paragraph for the interior of test cars. Well, perhaps we could highlight Ibiza just because it doesn't express the same temperament on the inside as it does on the outside. However, in terms of the feeling of spaciousness, he is one step ahead of everyone. The longitudinal movement of the front seat would also be sufficient for the centers of our basketball team's fenders, while the quarterback could still sit in the back. With the Fiesta, the opposite is true. For tall people, the longitudinal offset at the front is a bit small, but there is plenty of room at the back. We would prefer to find a compromise somewhere in between. However, the Fiesta is much more airy above the passengers' heads and gives the feeling of a small minivan. Clio is also among the leaders in this segment. The spaciousness of the cabin is noticeable in width at the elbows of the passengers, as well as above the "breathing" heads.

The C3 is smaller, but with a soft SUV-like design, it is much richer in space than it looks from the outside. The front seats are designed as a “recliner”, so expect more comfort but also more weight when cornering. The Micra's interior looks fresh and fun due to the two-tone dashboard, while the Japanese front seat capacity is satisfying. It has a lot more claustrophobia at the back, as the steep slope of the line from pillar B to pillar C significantly reduces the view through the window. If the aforementioned Japanese sympathized with the taller Europeans, Suzuki did not think about it. Anyone over 190 inches can forget about the optimal driving position, and there is clearly enough space in the back. All that remains is Kia, which, like all other parts of our assessment, is somewhere among the "point winners" in sports jargon.

The same goes for the usability of the cabin and what it offers for infotainment content. It has one USB port, which at a time when we almost all have smartphones and they empty quickly, there are too few of them, it has the classic sensors, but with a graphic screen (čk) between them, and it has an infotainment system that allows everything you need (DAB radio, Android Auto and Apple CarPlay for better connectivity with smartphones, and of course a touchscreen), but the graphics and user interface could be better - more tailored for in-car use. There’s also plenty of storage space, illuminated vanity mirrors, there are hooks in the trunk for hanging bags, ISOFIX mounts are well accessible, the cabin is illuminated separately front and rear, and the Rio has a light in the trunk. . Thus, the only concern was the lack of a smart key, which is very welcome in cars that are used for short distances (and with a lot of entries and exits).

The C3 is special in terms of design, but not in terms of internal performance. Its infotainment system is transparent, but some of the functions are too illogically hidden in the selectors and integrate almost all functions of the car. At the same time, we have to ask ourselves if it would be bad if some kind of air conditioning control were available without typing on the screen, but the generation that grew up with smartphones in their hands will get used to it very quickly. It's a shame the C3 doesn't have boot hooks, and it's a shame that, like Kia and some other competitors, it only has one USB port. Like all cars tested with a smart key, it only has sensors for unlocking the front doors, there are no headlights in the vanity mirrors, and the cab is illuminated with only one light bulb. The gauges are still classic, which for Citroen, given what the C3 is, is a missed opportunity to stand out even more, and the digital display among them is outdated in form and technology.

Even the Fiesta only has analog gauges with a clear but unused LCD screen in between, but it makes up for that with a really great Sync 3 infotainment system with a very crisp and crisp display, good graphics and user interface. Only Ibiza can compete with him on this side. In addition, the Fiesta has two USB ports (also Ibiza), ample storage space (also Ibiza), DAB radio (which Ibiza lacked) and excellent smartphone connectivity (where Ibiza also lags behind as it did not have Apple CarPlay or Android Auto). Both have a well-lit trunk with two bag hooks. The Ibiza LCD screen is more useful among analog gauges than the Fiesta because it can display more data at the same time and its colors are more comfortable for night driving.

The complete opposite is Clio. His “disease” is his R-Link infotainment system, which is based on the Android operating system and is too slow, freezes and often illogical. In addition, it does not allow advanced smartphone connections, and its screen resolution and graphics are among the worst. The image refers to the sensors: compared to other Renaults, they clearly show that the Clio is a generation older. The Clio has only one USB port, and as pluses, we considered illuminated vanity mirrors, hooks in the trunk, a smart key, as well as the convenience of a driver's workplace and interior space.

Micri is known to be newer than Clio. Its display among analog gauges is better, as is the infotainment system, which is not related to R-Link and which Renault should adopt as soon as possible. Wish it had Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, and wish the vanity mirrors were lit. Nissan with Micro is heavily targeting a female audience, so it's even less clear. One final blow: the Micra doesn't have an electric rear window, and you can't even pay for it. Very strange.

Swift? It is somewhere in the golden mean or just below it. CarPlay is absent, the infotainment interface is confusing, but it is quite nimble, only one light is illuminated in the cabin, one is also USB (and one is also a hook in the trunk).

Of course, I think this will significantly affect the price, but it quickly turns out that two things apply: a car with more equipment can be cheaper than competitors with less equipment, even when we try to equalize their equipment, and that it is better. the car will eventually have to pay more.

The cheapest car in the test was the Kia Rio 1.25 EX Motion at 15.490 euros, and the most expensive was the Ford Fiesta 1.0 EcoBoost with 100 hp. Titanium for 19.900 euros. The second cheapest car in the test was the Citroën C3 PureTech 110 S&S EAT6 Shine, which will be available in test configuration for €16.230, followed by the Renault Clio TCe 120 Intens for €16.290 and the Nissan Micra 0.9 IG-T Tekna for €18.100 . Also on trial were a Seat Ibiza with a 115-cylinder turbo-petrol engine producing 110 hp. and a Suzuki Swift with a 15-cylinder turbocharged engine producing 16 hp. Rooms without additional equipment cost from € XNUMX to XNUMX thousand euros. In this case, of course, this is only a rough estimate. Therefore, it is clear that the test vehicles themselves cannot be directly compared with each other, at least when it comes to prices and equipment.

We took into account how the equipment affects the price, (as always) checking how much the tested cars would cost if they had a certain set of equipment, which, in our opinion, such a car should have (and at Citroën we took the price of the model. With manual transmission ). It includes automatic light and rain sensor, self-extinguishing rearview mirror, smart key, DAB radio, infotainment system with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto interfaces, blind spot monitoring, speed limiter and parking sensors, mainly due to for severe operating conditions. fines for violation of traffic rules. Also added a system of recognition of road signs. And yes, we also wanted to install an electric rear window.

First of all, we required the car to have an automatic emergency braking system (AEB) for city and suburban speeds, which is also of great importance when evaluating EuroNCAP crash tests, as without it the car can no longer receive five stars. Unfortunately, we have found that this extremely useful equipment, which makes a significant contribution to the safety of car occupants and other road users, often has to choose from a range of accessories, often only in conjunction with relatively expensive higher equipment packages. It also turns out that you can't get many of the equipment you want at all because it's an older model like the Renault Clio that's already been updated and we can gradually expect a successor to it, or the brands just didn't foresee it.

In pursuit of the above list of equipment, one often has to resort to the highest equipment packages, especially when it comes to Asian brands that still offer accessories quite rigidly. For some models, such as the Ford Fiesta, this is also a pretty reasonable move. At the request of our editors, for example, an equipped car can be assembled on the basis of Shine medium equipment, but a Fiesta with the desired equipment and the Titanium package will cost you only a couple of hundred euros more. Plus, you'll also get quite a few other gear that Shine doesn't come with. Of course, the final price also depends on the discounts offered by all brands and can help get a well-equipped vehicle out of the showroom at a much more affordable price.

And what about the cost of driving, which is highly dependent on fuel consumption? Compared to standard laps, Suzuki Swift was the best at 4,5 liters per 5,9 kilometers, and Renault Clio was the worst with 8,3 liters of fuel per 7,6 kilometers. More significant was the average consumption, which we measured in the test, when all the cars were driving on the same route and the drivers took turns driving, so they were subjected to approximately the same loads and driving style. Renault Clio with a consumption of 5,9 liters of gasoline per hundred kilometers, unfortunately, is also in last place here, ahead of the Ford Fiesta with 0,1 liters. The Seat Ibiza was the best at 6 liters per hundred kilometers, followed by the Suzuki Swift at 3 liters with 6,7 liters per hundred kilometers. The difference with the Citroën C6,9 was already much greater, as the bill showed that it consumed 7,3 liters of gasoline per hundred kilometers, while the Kia Rio, the only representative with a naturally aspirated four-cylinder engine, was content with 0,1 liters of gasoline per hundred kilometers. . The Nissan Micra was already in the "more thirsty" category, consuming 1,8 liters of fuel per hundred kilometers. We also checked the consumption on the car computers and found that the difference was only XNUMX liters to XNUMX liters. If this is important to you, then when tracking fuel consumption, trust the real calculations, and not the car computer display.

What does this mean in euros? If the test Ibiza had to travel 100 kilometers, which usually takes about five years, 7.546 € 10.615 will be deducted at the current price for fuel. If you were driving a test Renault Clio, the same distance would cost you € XNUMX, which is a good three thousand € more. Of course, if we drove quite a lot, regardless of the consumption, as on the test lap. As shown by the results of normal laps, driving in all tested city cars can be much more favorable. Normal consumption was also much smoother, although here the difference between the most and least favorable almost reached one and a half liters.

When we finally divided the points with our Croatian colleagues from Auto Motor i Sport magazine (we did this by dividing exactly 30 points between the cars without consulting each other) and added them up, the result was not surprising - at least not up to par. Top. The Fiesta and Ibiza have been winning most of the comparison tests lately and are also vying for the top spot in ours. This time around, the win went to Ibiza, primarily due to having more room for shade on her back bench, and the lively TSI got it. The fact that Swift is third is not surprising: lively, economical, affordable enough. If you're not looking for a car with plenty of interior space, this is a great choice. Rio and C3 couldn't have been more different, but they were almost in a straight line, only a point apart. The Clio was also close by, but apparently the Micra was rather disappointed - we all had the uneasy feeling that the car promised more than it ended up with.

So the duel in the coming months will be the new Polo against Ibiza (and maybe even a Fiesta to have some fun). Considering that they both work on the same platform and belong to the same concern, this can be very interesting!

Matija Janežić

The Ibiza seems to be the most versatile car, and next to it is the Ford Fiesta, which the designers have again given significant driving dynamics. The Suzuki Swift remains a small car in the company of its growing peers, which can't be taken lightly in increasingly crowded urban environments, and it also makes a good impression with its combination of a three-cylinder petrol engine and a mild hybrid. The Citroën C3 and Kia Rio each have a solid set of good features in their own way, and the Clio is the oldest member and therefore may not have all the necessary equipment. The Nissan Micra is a car with a very ambitious design, but its designers seem to get out of breath too often.

Dusan Lukic

At the moment, the Fiesta seems to be not only the most modern and balanced, but also the most car-friendly - and this gave me an advantage over the Ibiza, which can compete with the Fiesta in all areas, and in some places even ahead. This. The Citroen is a great representative of what I would call a city car for anyone who doesn't want a classic, while the Rio is the complete opposite: a well-engineered and well-executed classic. The Swift has earned its pros with the propulsion technology, with its cons mostly due to being too small, as well as a boring chassis and a too weak infotainment system. The first criterion, in addition to the second, also buried the Micro (I also blame the poor chassis for this), and the second, in addition to the lack of auxiliary systems, the Clia.

Tomaž Porekar

So what are we looking for in small family cars. Smallness? Family? Both, of course, should be large enough, flexible and useful. Less important, of course, is the decoration that makes us happy, because it is playful, fun, unusual. If we think so - and I just chose such a starting point - for me, the really spacious Ibiza is at the top, which is also the most convincing in terms of engine, usability and economy. Right behind it is the Fiesta (with a more powerful engine, it could be different) ... Everyone else is the right size smaller, so I just sorted them in the background. The only real disappointment? Actually Mikra.

Sasha Kapetanovich

In the Volkswagen Group, Ibiza has been entrusted with a market premiere as the first model on the new platform, and if we weren't sure about that, the Polo would certainly have an edge here. But they don't count. Ibiza is spatially far from the concept of an urban kid, it offers the most assistance systems, and the motor technology of the VAG Group does not require additional praise. Ford has tweaked the dashboard a bit, with the new Fiesta playing on quieter notes, pampering it with more comfortable and advanced tech. With the Citröen C3, it is clear that they are completely dedicated to the task of creating the ideal city car: reliable, durable and unique. The Swift convinced me of good drivetrain and cornering pleasure, and a little less flexibility in the passenger compartment. The Clio and Rio do not want to stand out in any segment, while the Micra is not convincing enough despite its interesting and attractive design.

Ante Radič

My main criteria are driving dynamics and cabin comfort. Here Ibiza and Swift are slightly better than Fiesta and Rio, but hold on to the heart: all four are first division. The current Clio may be the oldest, but is already far from competitive, especially when paired with a turbocharged four-cylinder petrol engine. Its smaller three-cylinder counterpart from the Micra is a disappointment and falls short of the Micra's chassis. Citroen? It's chic and interesting, pleasantly different and comfortable, but I can't forgive the lack of any character in the driving dynamics.

Young Sower

The Ibiza has a wide variety of performance in the tests - good ergonomics, materials, driving performance and, like sweetie, an engine that gives the impression that in practice it is stronger than on paper. Fiesta parries him easily and scores less points just because of less back bench space. The Swift has driving dynamics that I enjoy, a simple design and an economical powerplant, and the Micra would have scored better if it had no problems in the value for money and engine category. In C3? In my opinion, the rest of the test is not quite competitive.

Suzuki Swift 1,0 Boosterjet SHVS

Basic data

Technical information

engine:	3-cylinder - in-line - turbo gasoline, 998 cm3
Energy transfer:	On the front wheels
Mass:	vehicle weight 875 kg / load capacity 505 kg
External dimensions:	3.840 mm x 1.735 x 1.495 mm
Inner dimensions:	Width: front 1.370 mm / back 1.370 mm Height: front 950-1.020 mm / back 930 mm
Box:	265 947-l

Seat Ibiza 1.0 TSI

Basic data

Technical information

engine:	3-cylinder - in-line - turbo gasoline, 999 cm3
Energy transfer:	On the front wheels
Mass:	vehicle weight 1.140 kg / load capacity 410 kg
External dimensions:	4.059 mm x 1.780 x 1.444 mm
Inner dimensions:	Width: front 1.460 mm / back 1.410 mm Height: front 920-1.000 mm / back 930 mm
Box:	355 823-l

Renault Clio Energy TCe 120 - price: + XNUMX rubles.

Basic data

Technical information

engine:	4-cylinder - in-line - turbo gasoline, 1.197 cm3
Energy transfer:	On the front wheels
Mass:	vehicle weight 1.090 kg / load capacity 541 kg
External dimensions:	4.062 mm x 1.945 x 1.448 mm
Inner dimensions:	Width: front 1.380 mm / back 1.380 mm Height: front 880 mm / back 847 mm
Box:	300 1.146-l

Nissan Micra 0.9 IG-T

Basic data

Technical information

engine:	3-cylinder - in-line - turbo gasoline, 898 cm3
Energy transfer:	On the front wheels
Mass:	vehicle weight 987 kg / load capacity 543 kg
External dimensions:	3.999 mm x 1.743 x 1.455 mm
Inner dimensions:	Width: front 1.430 mm / back 1.390 mm Height: front 940-1.000 mm / back 890 mm
Box:	300 1.004-l

1.25 Kia Rio

Basic data

Technical information

engine:	4-cylinder - in-line - petrol, 1.248 cm3
Energy transfer:	On the front wheels
Mass:	vehicle weight 1.110 kg / load capacity 450 kg
External dimensions:	4.065 mm x 1.725 x 1.450 mm
Inner dimensions:	Width: front 1.430 mm / back 1.430 mm Height: front 930-1.000 mm / back 950 mm
Box:	325 980-kg

Ford Fiesta 1.0 EcoBoost 74 kW

Basic data

Technical information

engine:	3-cylinder - in-line - turbo gasoline, 993 cm3
Energy transfer:	On the front wheels
Mass:	vehicle weight 1069 kg / load capacity 576 kg
External dimensions:	4.040 mm x 1.735 x 1.476 mm
Inner dimensions:	Width: 1.390mm front / 1.370mm rear Height: front 930-1.010 mm / back 920 mm
Box:	292 1093-l

Citroën C3 Puretech 110 S&S EAT 6 Shine

Basic data

Technical information

engine:	3-cylinder - in-line - turbo gasoline, 1.199 cm3
Energy transfer:	On the front wheels
Mass:	vehicle weight 1.050 kg / load capacity 550 kg
External dimensions:	3.996 mm x 1.749 x 1.747 mm
Inner dimensions:	Width: front 1.380 mm / back 1.400 mm Height: front 920-1.010 mm / back 910 mm
Box:	300 922-l