Renault Megane 2003 vs Chrysler PT Cruiser 2004
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 120 HP | 143 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 214 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 12.2 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 23 HP less power than Chrysler PT Cruiser, but torque is 86 NM more than Chrysler PT Cruiser. Despite less power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.5 | 10.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 12.4 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 5.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler PT Cruiser, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 795 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 6.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler PT Cruiser. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 57 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1090 km in combined cycle | 520 km in combined cycle | |
| 1330 km on highway | 650 km on highway | ||
| 1010 km with real consumption | 450 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 4 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Suzuki Grand Vitara | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Chrysler Grand Voyager, Chrysler Voyager, Jeep Cherokee, Dodge Grand Caravan | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Chrysler PT Cruiser might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Chrysler PT Cruiser 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: | 4.36 m | 4.29 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.54 m | |
|
Renault Megane is larger, but lower. Renault Megane is 7 cm longer than the Chrysler PT Cruiser, 3 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 14 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 190 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
490 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 12 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 1.8 metres less than that of the Chrysler PT Cruiser, which means Renault Megane can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`880 | 1`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Renault Megane has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Chrysler PT Cruiser has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Renault Megane, so Renault Megane quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2000 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Chrysler PT Cruiser has
| |