Renault Twingo II 1.2 Review

Click here if this is your business
Renault Twingo II 1.2
★★★★★
4.5
From 1 review
100.0% of users recommend this
  • Performance

  • Practicality

  • Reliability

  • Value For Money

Click here if this is your business

MarkinLondon's review of Renault Twingo II 1.2

“This Renault Twingo II is a must have tiny car, the...”

★★★★★

written by MarkinLondon on 22/06/2006

Good Points
Cult car, last French car that made history on the world market.
Extremely cheap to run (Up to 75mpg!!) and maintain.
Reliable, rarely you can have problems, especially on newer models (Twingo is in production since the early 90s)
Exclusivity, you could drive this unique car in the UK as it would be a special.
Quite and smooth either on A roads or motorways.
Fun to drive nonetheless the soft suspensions and quite a high rolling in the tight turns.
Huge internal room, for both driver and passengers, even on the rear seat I challenge every other city car on the market which can seat two 6ft tall guys more comfortable.

Bad Points
Lazy engine, pay the price of its 43Kw, especially full loaded or during high speed over-takes, much nippier the 16v - 55Kw versions.
Cheap materials on the cockpit
Small boot like in all other city cars
Only available left-hand-drive

General Comments
This Renault Twingo II is a must have tiny car, the perfect city car as far as I'm concerned, unbeatable in terms of comfort, flexibility and reliability. Easy to drive and parking thanks to serv-assistance steering and only 3.7 meters of length. Cute like few others, catch the eyes on the streets, not like many more anonymous-much more expensive modern cars.

Buy one, you'll love it!

  • 2002

    Year Manufactured

  • 4 years

    Length of ownership

  • 3

    Doors

  • Performance

  • Practicality

  • Reliability

  • Value For Money

If you are commenting on behalf of the company that has been reviewed, please consider upgrading to Official Business Response for higher impact replies.

Markinlondon's Response to MarkinLondon's Review

Written on: 22/06/2006

Big mistake on the fuel consumption, it's actually 46Mpg!

Reply to this comment
If you are commenting on behalf of the company that has been reviewed, please consider upgrading to Official Business Response for higher impact replies.
Was this review helpful? 0 0