Renault Megane 2006 vs Mazda 3 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 151 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.1 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
| Renault Megane engine produces 5 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 6 NM more than Mazda 3. Despite the higher power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 7.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.4 l/100km | 8.7 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Megane consumes 1.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 720 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 880 km on highway | ||
| 810 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 25 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato, Kia Carens | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda 3 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: | 4.50 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.47 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Megane is 1 cm longer than the Mazda 3, 2 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 520 litres | 413 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1285 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Renault Megane has 107 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.2 metres less than that of the Mazda 3. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`800 | 1`730 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | below average | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1400 | 2400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.3/10 | 8.8/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |