Renault Clio vs Kia Rio

The Clio's seven-inch touchscreen with satnav is a big draw, backed by cruise control and auto lights. Notably absent are a reversing camera and power rear windows. The interior can be blinged and Renault keeps it affordable. A five-year warranty doesn't hurt and the Clio will cost $299 a year to service for the first three years.

The Rio brings a lot to the party mechanically but not in features. This generation of Rio doesn't get a touchscreen and the radio and digital driver's display are in old-school calculator red. There are 17-inch alloys and cruise control and the Bluetooth connects readily. In the conventional Korean cabin, build quality and (most) plastics and switchgear look and feel premium. Leading seven-year warranty pairs with seven years' annual servicing at about $2400 all up.

The 1.2-litre turbo, matched to a six-speed dual-clutch auto, can lag a little off the line. It's better in manual mode but that's not the point of a city car, so you're stuck with a semi-intelligent auto that hesitates before changing up or down. The engine, though no powerhouse, is a good fit for the 1100kg car, with solid pull from 2000rpm. Fuel use is rated at 5.2L/100km; Carsguide logged low 6L.

Still no turbos among Rios. Nothing wrong with the direct-injection 1.6-litre but, as it needs to rev harder than the Clio to do its best, it feels slower - and sounds thrashier - when pressed to perform from a standing start. It is more flexible on the move, thanks to a smooth six-speed auto that will drop a couple of cogs when provoked. Official fuel use is 5.4L/100km; Carsguide got 6.7L.

Younger buyers will gravitate to the Clio's lighter, look-at-me interior. The entire car can be configured as a style statement. Even in standard guise the Clio dares to be different, from the body-protecting plastic bumpers on the doors to the horizontal digital speedo between conventional round dials. Rear space isn't close to class-leading, despite a more-than-decent boot.

Smart but no standout. The recent refresh gives a distinctive appearance with a narrow-nosed grille and deeply straked air inlets. Same can't be said for the generic hatch rear. The inside is spacious and the Kia feels more grown-up than the Clio, albeit with more subdued palette of trim options.

ANCAP gives the Clio five stars, noting 'acceptable" protection for front occupants in the frontal crash test. There are seat belt reminders front and rear but no rear curtain airbags, a glaring omission that puts the car behind every mainstream rival in its class. It otherwise performed well in safety tests, scoring 35.87/37.

The Rio comes with six airbags and five ANCAP stars. It was rated at 34.99/37, having lost a full point when a rear door was found not to be fully latched after the side-impact test.

Firm suspension doesn't cause the Clio much grief around town. It softens the big bumps rather than trying to subdue them, so some shock belatedly and distantly transmits back to the cabin. Some will call it engaging, others unduly harsh, depending on driving style. The steering is decent and the chassis will outperform the grip of the standard tyres. The auto is the weak link: it just isn't as decisive as its rivals and that detracts marginally from a light car star.

Default driving is the Rio's reason for being. It is inoffensive and responsive on the school run or the suburban slalom. Wind up the four-cylinder and it is an enthusiastic amateur. The suspension rightly favours city commutes over country crusades, so it is genuinely supple around town with progressive roll as the pace picks up. It doesn't set the world on fire but does the job capably. The switchgear feels good but is decidedly old-fashioned. All-round vision is good but a reversing camera would be reassuring.