Mazda MX-5 2009 vs Renault Megane 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| 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: | 126 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 167 NM | 151 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.9 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
|
Mazda MX-5 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda MX-5 engine produces 16 HP more power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 16 NM more than Renault Megane. Thanks to more power Mazda MX-5 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.0 l/100km | 7.6 l/100km | |
|
By specification Mazda MX-5 consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that by driving the Mazda MX-5 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 90 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Mazda MX-5 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 780 km in combined cycle | |
| 900 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 620 km with real consumption | 780 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 (Mazda MX-5) 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: | 16 years | 25 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Megane might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.72 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.72 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.26 m | 1.43 m | |
| Mazda MX-5 is 24 cm longer than the Renault Megane, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda MX-5 is 18 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 150 litres | 211 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Mazda MX-5 has 61 litres less trunk space than the Renault Megane. This could mean that the Mazda MX-5 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda MX-5 is 0.9 metres less than that of the Renault Megane, which means Mazda MX-5 can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`375 | 1`839 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mazda MX-5 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 50 percent more cases than Mazda MX-5, so Mazda MX-5 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | no data | 7600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda MX-5 has
|
Renault Megane has
| |