Renault Megane 2009 vs Mazda 3 2009
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 HP | 105 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 25 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 45 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.5 | 6.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Mazda 3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.2 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 30 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 920 km in combined cycle | 870 km in combined cycle | |
| 1130 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Mazda 3 engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 16 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Grand Scenic | Used only for this car | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.46 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.47 m | |
| Renault Megane is 17 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 5 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 344 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
377 litres | 1360 litres | |
| Renault Megane has 4 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 (by 983 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.5 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Renault Megane can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`728 | 1`770 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 4200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |