Dacia Spring vs Renault Twingo E-Tech
Renault Twingo E-Tech leads 3 to 2
Biggest differences: Boot — Dacia Spring 325 l, Renault Twingo E-Tech 360 l · WLTP range — Dacia Spring 250 km, Renault Twingo E-Tech 263 km · Consumption — Dacia Spring 12.7 kWh/100 km, Renault Twingo E-Tech 12.2 kWh/100 km.
Dacia Spring
The second-generation Dacia Spring is a city hatchback in the A segment, featuring a 27.5 kWh battery, a WLTP range of 250 km, and a power output of 82 horsepower.
Renault Twingo E-Tech
The Renault Twingo E-Tech is a city hatchback in the A segment, offering a range of 263 kilometers and compact dimensions.
Profile against the market: Dacia Spring vs Renault Twingo E-Tech
- Dacia SpringElectric 80
Renault Twingo E-Tech27.5 kWh
Dacia Spring or Renault Twingo E-Tech — who wins where
Renault Twingo E-Tech leads 3 to 2
The score leaves out metrics where data is missing on one side.
Click a slice to see only those metrics. Each bar shows where the car stands against the whole catalogue.
- WLTP range kmRenault Twingo E-Tech +13 km
- Battery kWhNo difference
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmRenault Twingo E-Tech −0.5 kWh/100 km
- Power PSDacia Spring +2 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sNo difference
- Top speed km/hNo difference
- DC charging kWNo difference
- AC charging kWNo data
- Charging ↓ minNo difference
- Weight ↓ kgDacia Spring −13 kg
- Boot lRenault Twingo E-Tech +35 l
Technical data: Dacia Spring vs Renault Twingo E-Tech
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters |  Dacia SpringElectric 80 | Renault Twingo E-Tech 27.5 kWh | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 250 km | 263 km | Renault +13 km |
| Battery | 27.5 kWh | 27.5 kWh | No difference |
| Consumption ↓ | 12.7 kWh/100 km | 12.2 kWh/100 km | Renault −0.5 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 50 kW | 50 kW | No difference |
| AC charging | — | 11 kW | — |
| Charging 10–80% ↓ | 30 min | 30 min | No difference |
| Range per minute of charging | 5.8 km/min | 6.1 km/min | Renault +0.3 km/min |
| Voltage | — | 400 V | — |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 82 PS | 80 PS | Dacia +2 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 12.1 s | 12.1 s | No difference |
| Top speed | 130 km/h | 130 km/h | No difference |
| Drivetrain | FWD | FWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 1187 kg | 1200 kg | Dacia −13 kg |
| Boot | 325 l | 360 l | Renault +35 l |
| V2L (external power) | Yes | Yes | — |
| Length | 3855 mm | 3789 mm | Dacia +66 mm |
| Width | 1722 mm | 1720 mm | Dacia +2 mm |
| Height | 1519 mm | 1495 mm | Dacia +24 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2492 mm | 2500 mm | Renault +8 mm |
The better value in each row is bold and underlined in the colour of the car. Metrics marked ↓ — lower is better. Dimensions are shown without picking a winner.
Energy cost calculator
Dacia Spring
Renault Twingo E-Tech
Amounts are in your currency — enter prices in the currency you use.
Video reviews of both models
Dacia Spring
Renault Twingo E-Tech
Other comparisons in this class: Hatchback, segment A
Frequently asked questions about this comparison
Which has the longer range — Dacia Spring or Renault Twingo E-Tech?
The Renault Twingo E-Tech goes further: 263 km WLTP against the 250 km of the Dacia Spring. That is a difference of 13 km.
Which charges faster?
The Dacia Spring accepts up to 50 kW DC, the Renault Twingo E-Tech up to 50 kW. Charging from 10 to 80% takes 30 and 30 min respectively.
Which is cheaper to run?
The Renault Twingo E-Tech uses less electricity: 12.2 kWh/100 km against 12.7 kWh/100 km in the Dacia Spring. Over 15000 km a year that is a difference of 75 kWh — the calculator on this page turns it into money.
Technical data comes from official manufacturer materials and we do our best to verify it, but a manufacturer can change a specification without notice and mistakes do happen. Confirm the figures with a dealer before you buy — we accept no liability for decisions made on the basis of this data. Full disclaimer
Range, consumption and weight are given for the base configuration: manufacturers homologate them as a band of values that depends on wheels and equipment (e.g. 533–592 km), and we take the lightest variant, on the smallest wheels — i.e. the most favourable. The same model on larger wheels will travel a shorter distance.