Mitsubishi Colt 2007 vs Renault Megane 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 210 NM | 151 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.4 seconds | 11.8 seconds | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is more dynamic to drive. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 40 HP more power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 59 NM more than Renault Megane. Thanks to more power Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 3.4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 660 km in combined cycle | 850 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| 590 km with real consumption | 800 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 9 years | 25 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Smart ForFour | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Mitsubishi Colt 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: | 3.89 m | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller, but higher. Mitsubishi Colt is 48 cm shorter than the Renault Megane, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 6 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 190 litres | 190 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 490 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.6 metres more than that of the Renault Megane, which means Mitsubishi Colt can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`775 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3400 | 2800 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 8.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Renault Megane has
| |