Since March 1976, Renault has been offering zippy, small hatchbacks continuously. Ranging from lukewarm to boiling hot, with or without the help of a turbocharger and with an engine displacement from 1.4 to 2.0 liter. I caught a bunch of them at the 2018 edition of the biyearly Renaultoloog Festival.
Starting with a 1983 Renault 5 Alpine Turbo, 112 DIN-hp from its 1.4 liter engine. The wide tires with fully matching fender flares are a nice touch.
Always pleasant to find some extra info near or on the car.
Without any doubt, the R5 Turbo is one of the most famous hot hatches ever. RWD and with a rear mid-engine, which makes it a two-seater.
Renault’s interpretation of a pit bull terrier, 4,857 of them (Turbo and Turbo2) were let loose. Good ones cost a small fortune these days, this one is a 1985 Turbo2.
In 1984, Renault introduced the second generation of the 5, also known as the Supercinq/Superfive. Under the hood a transverse rather than a longitudinal engine.
Still unmistakably an R5, from all points of view. The GT turbo -pictured a fine 1986 example- got a 115 DIN-hp, 1.4 liter engine…
…whereas this 1990 GTE has a naturally aspirated, 1.7 liter power unit, good for 94 DIN-hp.
Keep in mind that all (Super)Fives are flyweights. To put only 94 hp in the right perspective, this sweet GTE has a registered curb weight of 870 kg (1,918 lbs).
2000 Renault Clio Sport 2.0 16v, naturally aspirated, 169 DIN-hp.
It’s a Clio Mk2, introduced in 1998. The production of the first Clio generation started in June 1990, it superseded the Superfive.
And here we are, in the present time, with a Renault Clio R.S. Trophy, 220 wild horses from a turbocharged 1.6 liter engine.
The current generation of the Clio, the Mk4, was introduced in 2012. The fifth generation of Renault’s B-segment model is about to be unveiled. And yet again, it will be a bestseller in Europe, you can count on that.
It speaks for itself that Renault is duty bound to offer sublime C-segment rockets too. Today’s bonus: a 2012 Renault Mégane R.S. with a turbocharged 2.0 liter engine, 265 DIN-hp.
Related reading:
Car Show Outtake: 1994 Renault Clio Williams – The Hottest Subcompact Hatch Of The Nineties
Curbside Classic: 1979 Renault 5 GTL (Le Car) – Style Pioneer
Curbside Classic: 1983-86 Renault R5 Turbo II – Le Monster Car
This makes me wish Renault had more of a presence in the USA than just being the partial owner of Nissan. Those 2000+ Clios look great and the power ratings are impressive to me.
In the US, is there any market to speak of for B-segment/subcompact hatchbacks?
This segment is highly important in Europe with very strong competition from Peugeot (Opel included), Volkswagen and Ford.
In the US, is there any market to speak of for B-segment/subcompact hatchbacks?
As you would suspect, with Ford abandoning the Fiesta, Toyota abandoning the Yaris hatchback, the Mazda2 hatch gone, the Chevrolet Sonic and Spark selling in tiny numbers, the answer would be no. You may as well add C segment hatchbacks to the endangered species list as well.
The only Renaults that would be relevant in the US now are the SUVs, and we already get those, badged as Nissans.
And yet another market segment falls victim to the dreaded SUV. This time, it’s small CUVs like the Jeep Renegade that’s killing the B-segment subcompact hatchback. I would imagine that even stuff like the craptacular Trax sells better than Chevy’s cheaper, traditional (and more practical) cars.
Ironically, the one bright spot is the bottom-feeder Mitsubishi Mirage. It generally gets panned in reviews but sells okay (at least by Mitsubishi standards). Unfortunately, it’s probably because Mitsubishi is one of the manufacturers that sells mainly to those with bad credit who can’t get approved for anything better.
I’m surprised the new Corolla hatchback isn’t selling better than it is given the reviews it’s gotten. FWIU there are interior-space issues but it’s also possibly supply- rather than demand-limited. The local dealer has two on the lot as of today which is the most they’ve had at one time, while they have dozens of C-HRs and outgoing-model Corolla sedans (and until recently outgoing-model RAV4s but those are selling down) on a satellite lot. Next design cycle is a good five years off and I suggest returning to the original Matrix concept and (pre-2009) look.
I would imagine that even stuff like the craptacular Trax sells better than Chevy’s cheaper, traditional (and more practical) cars.
Calendar year 2018 US sales:
Spark: 23,602 up 4.5% y/y
Sonic: 20,613 down 31.9% y/y
Trax: 89,916 up 13.4% y/y
Buick Encore (Trax in fancy dress) 93,073 up 5.7% y/y
PSA has announced a replacement for the Korean built Mokka (Trax) for 2020 (124418 sold from Dec 17 through Nov 18). PSA has also announced the Karl (Spark) will be dropped in 2019. (48160 sold Dec 17-Nov 18) GM has spun the Korean engineering department off into a stand alone company, separate from the car building company. I would expect Korean production to end when PSA stops buying the Mokka and Karl as the cut in volume would be impossible to make up elsewhere, leaving GMK deep in the red, so the Trax would be replaced by Chinese/Mexican product.
Well Steve, you’ve been asked before, but it’s about time you start to write articles here…
“In the US, is there any market to speak of for B-segment/subcompact hatchbacks? ”
as others have noted, no. it’s really sad. the few hatches we do get are of the four door variety. even the golf is four door only now. virtually all of these are only available, if at all, with a manual at the lowest trim level. as far as i can tell the only 2 door hatch with a stick, leather and a sunroof is the mini.
Though Renault had the 1.6 A-Type Turbo in the Fuego, it would have been fascinating seeing the 5 / Supercinq and 11 feature a 1.6 C-Type turbo that was very feasible based on the 1555-1596cc C-Type engines used by Dacia and Volvo.
iirc, the A type went out of production when the F series came out. If I had been running AMC, I would have used the 1.6 A series in the base Alliance, instead of the Cléon, but they didn’t ask me.
Would the A-Type engine have even fitted into the Alliance?
Additionally was the 1965cc F3R engine Alliance GTA engine capable of putting out more power from 95 hp to 101+ hp? Since am unsure to what degree it is related to the 1998cc F-Type engines used in the Renault 21 and other models, if instead it is based on the 1.7 F-Type then using the latter as a rough guide the 1965cc GTA engine should be putting out around 106-121 hp at most.
Also have to wonder about the rationale of developing the 1.7 F-Type, instead of directly creating an earlier petrol version of the 1.6 F-Type diesel and allowing the 1.6 F-Type petrol to limited to just the Volvo 440/460.
Essentially a non-turbo 1596cc Cleon would have potentially put out around 68-105 hp, with the turbocharged version potentially putting out around 106-135 hp. Both of which would have been useful for the European 5 and 11.
Using the later related 74-78 hp 1390cc E-Type as a guide, the 1.6 E-Type would in turn put out around around 85-90 hp before evolving into the related K-Type engines (where the 1.6 K-Type puts out anywhere from 74 hp to 133 hp).
Would the A-Type engine have even fitted into the Alliance?
The A type predated the R9/Alliance by 2 decades, and the R9 was designed to exploit the tieup with AMC. So, if the guys in charge had decided the Alliance needed more beans for US driving conditions, they could have made sure the A would fit when the R9 was designed.
As it was, we in the US only got the A in 1647cc form in the 18 and Fuego. I drove an 18 with the 1.6 and automatic and it was bog slow. Why oh why did they burden the 18 and Fuego, in non-turbo form, with such a weak engine when the 2.2 J series was already in production? As it was, US market 18s and Fuegos only got the 2.2 in 85, long after the train had left the station on these models.
I would love to pick François Castaing’s brain on the decision making that went into the Alliance, from the weak engines to the fragile parts. I have a hunch that Renault, at that time the best selling brand in Europe, designed the 9/11 to meet European expectations for reliability and durability, then handed the drawings to AMC. AMC then passed the prints to it’s vendors with the direction “make this, and make it cheap”, without looking at the MTBF in Renault’s test data.
Doubt it would have fitted into the Alliance though would have been interesting seeing versions featuring 12-valve or even turbocharged 2.0-2.2 J-Type engines, guess it made more economic sense to use the 1.7-2.0 F-Type units.
It would have fascinating seeing where AMC goes under Renault had Georges Besse not been assassinated.
I fondly remember the days those 5 Alpine’s en turbo’s were cheap to buy and drive. Sad enough that also ment they were trhased and trown away. Would love to have a clean first gen Alpine these days.
The forgotten Renault 5 LS was the first hot R5, (1974 – 75) it had Kangourou headlights with double lenses, tinted windows and sporty steel wheels, it was succeeded by the R5 TS and then came Alpine 5.
The current Megane RS is widely regarded by Aussie journalists as being the most pure, wild hot hatch in its class. I’d love to take one for a spin.
…”I’d love to take one for a spin”…Ditto!
As a matter of fact, I would like to own one. In a few weeks I’ll be 53, it would be a great last (new) car with an ICE to buy.
There’s a video of several convertible Alliances getting together in France on YouTube. It appears that they did it often until maybe 2012 or so. I always hope to see one in a pic from European shows just to verify that one is there somehow and still rolling.