BMW 3 series 2007 vs Renault Megane 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 3.0 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 306 HP | 130 HP | |
| Torque: | 400 NM | 190 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 6 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is more dynamic to drive. BMW 3 series engine produces 176 HP more power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 210 NM more than Renault Megane. Thanks to more power BMW 3 series reaches 100 km/h speed 3.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.9 | 7.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 11.3 l/100km | 7.9 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification BMW 3 series consumes 2.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the BMW 3 series could require 390 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, BMW 3 series consumes 3.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 63 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 630 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
| 860 km on highway | 1030 km on highway | ||
| 550 km with real consumption | 750 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 (BMW 3 series) 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 km | 280'000 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 BMW 3 series engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 10 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW X6, BMW Z4 | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Grand Scenic | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW 3 series might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The BMW 3 series 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: | 4.58 m | 4.49 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.38 m | 1.43 m | |
| BMW 3 series is 10 cm longer than the Renault Megane, 3 cm narrower, while the height of BMW 3 series is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 210 litres | 211 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
350 litres | no data | |
| BMW 3 series has 1 litres less trunk space than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the BMW 3 series is 0.1 metres more than that of the Renault Megane. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`180 | 1`865 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | below average | |
| BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 9600 | 8600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
BMW 3 sērija has
|
Renault Megane has
| |