The rear-mounted motor does bring other benefits. The entry-level 999cc naturally aspirated three-cylinder SCe petrol engine is mounted transversely, inclined by 49deg and reconfigured for compactness. It produces 69bhp and 67lb ft and drives the rear wheels via a five-speed manual gearbox. This version, called the SCe 70, is also available with a stop/start system – a variant dubbed the SCe 70 Stop & Start.
Those are competitive but unexceptional outputs, but more puff can be had from a range-topping turbocharged 898cc model called the Energy TCe 90 Stop & Start. It produces a more respectable 89bhp and 100lb ft. While the recent addition to the engine range is exclusively used to power the Twingo GT which produces 108bhp and 125lb ft of peak twist from the same engine block.
With no engine to encumber them, the Twingo’s front wheels can turn through 45deg of steering lock in either direction – about 50 percent more than most front-engined cars’. The turning circle is just 8.6m; again, beatable, but solely in a Toyota iQ.
The Twingo is constructed of high-strength steel but has a ‘soft’ frontal section featuring bonnet, bumper and front wings made of Noryl memory plastic, which is light, good on pedestrian protection and pops back into shape after a minor ding. Suspension is via independent struts at the front and a de Dion torsion beam at the rear.
Committing to a rear-engined construction can’t have been an easy thing for safety-conscious Renault. As Daimler discovered with Smart more than a decade ago, front-engined cars tend to perform better in frontal crash tests because the weight of their engines doesn’t add to the deformation of the passenger compartment. In a like-for-like frontal crash, the average rear-engined car has 150kg of engine and transmission trying to force its way through the cabin.
Renault’s answer to this for the Twingo was to engineer crash pathways that force the engine down under the cabin floor in the event of a serious collision. Elsewhere, the car’s bodyshell is designed for particular strength in the transmission tunnel, sills and doors in order to preserve the integrity of the cockpit.
The car missed a five-star crash rating by Euro NCAP, scoring only 78 percent for adult occupant protection and 68 percent for pedestrian protection, despite its extensive ‘soft’ nose and under-bumper padding.