Citroen Nemo 2009 vs Renault Scenic 2012
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 68 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 160 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 18 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is a more dynamic driving. Citroen Nemo engine produces 42 HP less power than Renault Scenic, whereas torque is 100 NM less than Renault Scenic. Due to the lower power, Citroen Nemo reaches 100 km/h speed 5.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.5 | 4.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.4 l/100km | 5.8 l/100km | |
|
The Citroen Nemo is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Citroen Nemo consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen Nemo could require 60 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Citroen Nemo consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1000 km in combined cycle | 1460 km in combined cycle | |
| 1180 km on highway | 1530 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 1030 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Scenic gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 2 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Scenic might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Citroen Nemo 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. | |||
| Renault Scenic 2012 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Renault Scenic 2012 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.96 m | 4.37 m | |
| Width: | 2.02 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.64 m | |
| Citroen Nemo is 41 cm shorter than the Renault Scenic, 17 cm wider, while the height of Citroen Nemo is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 360 litres | 470 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1870 litres | |
|
Renault Scenic has more luggage space. Citroen Nemo has 110 litres less trunk space than the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Citroen Nemo is 1 metres less than that of the Renault Scenic, which means Citroen Nemo can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`700 | 1`967 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Renault Scenic scores higher in safety tests. The Renault Scenic scores significantly higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 2600 | 6000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen Nemo has
|
Renault Scenic has
| |