Dacia Spring vs Renault Twingo E-Tech
Biggest differences: Power — Dacia Spring 45 PS, Renault Twingo E-Tech 80 PS · DC charging — Dacia Spring 30 kW, Renault Twingo E-Tech 50 kW · AC charging — Dacia Spring 7 kW, Renault Twingo E-Tech 11 kW.
Dacia Spring
The Dacia Spring is a city hatchback belonging to the A-segment, offering two engine options with power outputs of 45 horsepower and 65 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 45
Renault Twingo E-Tech27.5 kWh
Dacia Spring or Renault Twingo E-Tech — who wins where
Renault Twingo E-Tech leads 9 to 1
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 +33 km
- Battery kWhRenault Twingo E-Tech +0.7 kWh
- Consumption ↓ kWh/100 kmRenault Twingo E-Tech −1.7 kWh/100 km
- Power PSRenault Twingo E-Tech +35 PS
- 0–100 km/h ↓ sRenault Twingo E-Tech −6.9 s
- Top speed km/hRenault Twingo E-Tech +5 km/h
- DC charging kWRenault Twingo E-Tech +20 kW
- AC charging kWRenault Twingo E-Tech +4 kW
- Weight ↓ kgDacia Spring −305 kg
- Boot lRenault Twingo E-Tech +70 l
Technical data: Dacia Spring vs Renault Twingo E-Tech
Bold and underline = better value · ↓ = lower is better · — = no data
| Key parameters |  Dacia SpringElectric 45 | Renault Twingo E-Tech 27.5 kWh | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Range and energy | |||
| WLTP range | 230 km | 263 km | Renault +33 km |
| Battery | 26.8 kWh | 27.5 kWh | Renault +0.7 kWh |
| Consumption ↓ | 13.9 kWh/100 km | 12.2 kWh/100 km | Renault −1.7 kWh/100 km |
| Charging | |||
| DC charging | 30 kW | 50 kW | Renault +20 kW |
| AC charging | 7 kW | 11 kW | Renault +4 kW |
| Charging ⚠ | 56 min 0–80% | 30 min 10–80% | 26 min |
| Range per minute of charging | 3.3 km/min | 6.1 km/min | Renault +2.8 km/min |
| Voltage | 400 V | 400 V | No difference |
| Performance and drivetrain | |||
| Power | 45 PS | 80 PS | Renault +35 PS |
| 0–100 km/h ↓ | 19 s | 12.1 s | Renault −6.9 s |
| Top speed | 125 km/h | 130 km/h | Renault +5 km/h |
| Drivetrain | FWD | FWD | — |
| Practicality | |||
| Weight ↓ | 895 kg | 1200 kg | Dacia −305 kg |
| Boot | 290 l | 360 l | Renault +70 l |
| V2L (external power) | Yes | Yes | — |
| Length | 3701 mm | 3789 mm | Renault +88 mm |
| Width | 1583 mm | 1720 mm | Renault +137 mm |
| Height | 1489 mm | 1495 mm | Renault +6 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2423 mm | 2500 mm | Renault +77 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 230 km of the Dacia Spring. That is a difference of 33 km.
Which is more powerful — Dacia Spring or Renault Twingo E-Tech?
The Renault Twingo E-Tech is stronger: 80 PS against the 45 PS of the Dacia Spring. The gap is 35 PS.
Which has the bigger boot?
The Renault Twingo E-Tech takes more: 360 l against 290 l in the Dacia Spring. The difference is 70 l.
Which charges faster?
The Dacia Spring accepts up to 30 kW DC, the Renault Twingo E-Tech up to 50 kW.
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.