BMW 3 series 2010 vs Renault Megane 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 184 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.4 seconds | 13.2 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 74 HP more power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 140 NM more than Renault Megane. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 4.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 5.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.4 l/100km | 5.8 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 61 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1080 km in combined cycle | 1200 km in combined cycle | |
| 1290 km on highway | 1360 km on highway | ||
| 950 km with real consumption | 1030 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | Front wheel drive (FWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Renault Megane) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW 3 series) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 17 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X3, BMW X1 | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The BMW 3 series engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.61 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.38 m | 1.43 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 13 cm longer than the Renault Megane, 3 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 210 litres | 211 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
350 litres | no data | |
| BMW 3 series has 1 litres less trunk space than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.1 metres more than that of the Renault Megane. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`100 | 1`899 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | low | |
| BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 60 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 13 600 | 7600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Renault Megane has
| |