Performance duelHome › Duel

Toyota GR86 vs Renault Clio 4 RS 200 : which one is faster?

0-100 km/h, 400 m, 1000 m, top speed — physics simulation calibrated on 7 measures.

400 m
Renault Clio 4 RS 200VMax
94
0 – 100 km/h
6.20s
0.43 s
GR86
6.63s
400 m standing start
14.36s
0.38 s
GR86
14.74s
Top speed
223
4 km/h
Clio 4
227
Power238 ch
Power200 ch
Torque250 Nm
Torque240 Nm
Weight1 270 kg
Weight1 245 kg
DrivetrainRear-wheel drive (RWD)
DrivetrainFront-wheel drive (FWD)
GearboxManual · 6 sp.
GearboxAutomated manual ·…
Faster
Toyota
GR86
2022
6,20 s
223 km/h
Power238 ch
Torque250 Nm
Weight1 270 kg
DrivetrainRear-wheel drive (RWD)
VMax
Renault Clio 4 RS 200
Renault
Clio 4 RS 200
2014
6,63 s
227 km/h
Power200 ch
Torque240 Nm
Weight1 245 kg
DrivetrainFront-wheel drive (FWD)
Toyota GR86
2022 · PETROL · 238 ch
Renault Clio 4 RS 200
2014 · PETROL · 200 ch
0-30 km/h1,75 s
0-50 km/h2,84 s
0-80 km/h4,69 s
0-100 km/h6,20 s
0-120 km/h8,03 s
0-160 km/h13,53 s
0-200 km/h26,07 s
400 m DA14,36 s
1 000 m DA26,11 s
VMax223 km/h
0-30 km/h1,63 s
0-50 km/h2,74 s
0-80 km/h4,66 s
0-100 km/h6,63 s
0-120 km/h8,72 s
0-160 km/h15,28 s
0-200 km/h28,70 s
400 m DA14,74 s
1 000 m DA26,79 s
VMax227 km/h
DQM92%
GR86
--
Clio 4 RS 200
--

Simulation de performance

Race simulation at real speed

CONFIDENCE 92%
400 m result
14.36s
Toyota GR86
Gap
0.38s
Distance
400 m
Dist.
GR86
Gap
Clio 4
0 m
0.00 s
0 km/h
0 m
0.00 s
0 km/h
100 m
6.51 s
104 km/h
0 m
6.50 s
99 km/h
200 m
9.53 s
132 km/h
~5 m
1 long.
9.67 s
126 km/h
400 m
14.35 s
165 km/h
~17 m
3½ long.
14.74 s
157 km/h
600 m
18.53 s
179 km/h
~26 m
5½ long.
19.07 s
174 km/h
1,000 m
26.10 s
200 km/h
~37 m
8 long.
26.78 s
197 km/h

Calibrated physics simulation: SCx via VMax, power curves, Crr via WLTP, drivetrain losses. Manufacturer 0-100 is the calibration target. Confidence 92 %.

400 m
RACE MODE

Upcoming offersExclusive

Receive personalized offers

Pour recevoir les meilleures offres près de chez vous



GR86 vs Clio 4 RS 200: chronicle of a drag race at 227 km/h

The launch: 0 to 100 km/h

Off the line, the GR86 hits 100 km/h in 6.20 s versus 6.63 s for the Clio 4 RS 200. The 0.43 s gap is negligible: both vehicles are neck and neck.

From 100 km/h to 400 metres

At 200 metres, the GR86 is doing 132 km/h against 126 km/h for the Clio 4 RS 200. The gap is 0.14 s. The challenger starts to claw back ground.

At 400 metres standing start, the GR86 crosses the line in 14.35 s versus 14.74 s. The 0.38 s gap represents roughly 17 m of track — two to three car lengths.

Beyond 400 metres: top speed comes into play

Past 400 metres, the GR86 continues to build its lead. At 600 metres, it runs at 179 km/h versus 174 km/h. At 1,000 metres, the GR86 finishes in 26.10 s versus 26.78 s, with a 0.68 s lead. Both vehicles have similar top speeds (223 vs 227 km/h), preventing any comeback.

What the numbers don’t tell you

Electronically capped at 227 km/h, the Clio 4 RS 200 never reaches its natural aerodynamic ceiling in this duel. That’s not a physical limit of the motor — it’s a deliberate manufacturer decision, typically tied to standard-fit tyre ratings or model-range positioning.

With two combustion powertrains, the difference comes down to power-to-weight ratio (5.34 kg/hp vs 6.23 kg/hp) and transmission (Manual vs Automatic).

In European road use (130 km/h max), both vehicles reach the legal speed limit in under 10.26 seconds. The 0.43 s difference in 0 to 100 km/h is mostly felt in motorway merging and overtaking.

Toyota GR86 is slightly faster than the Renault Clio 4 RS 200 to 100 km/h. The edge holds on standing starts but may narrow at higher speeds depending on aerodynamic load.

Données de performance issues de simulations physiques calibrées (moteur Apex). Consommation basée sur les données WLTP constructeur. Les performances réelles peuvent varier selon les conditions d'utilisation.

Prix énergie indicatifs : essence 1,85€/L, diesel 1,75€/L, électricité 0,25€/kWh (tarif domestique). Calculs basés sur 20 000 km/an.

Caralogy est un service indépendant de comparaison. Les données affichées sont fournies à titre informatif et ne constituent pas une offre commerciale.