Dacia Logan 2008 vs Renault Scenic 2003
| Body: | Estate car / wagon | Minivan / MPV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 87 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 127 NM | 152 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is a more dynamic driving. Dacia Logan engine produces 28 HP less power than Renault Scenic, whereas torque is 25 NM less than Renault Scenic. Due to the lower power, Dacia Logan reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.8 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.6 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Dacia Logan is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Dacia Logan consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Dacia Logan could require 90 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Dacia Logan consumes 0.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 50 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 640 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 790 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Scenic gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 28 years | 27 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Renault Clio, Dacia Dokker, Renault Kangoo, Dacia Lodgy | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | |
| 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. | |||
| Renault Scenic 2003 1.6 engine: The engine is very robust and long-lived, up to half a million kilometres, and can suffer minor damage, but overall it is quite reliable. Fuel consumption is relatively high for these engines, but they are not particularly demanding on fuel quality.
The most critical ... More about Renault Scenic 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.47 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.64 m | 1.62 m | |
| Dacia Logan is 21 cm longer than the Renault Scenic, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Dacia Logan is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 700 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
no data | 1840 litres | |
|
Dacia Logan has more luggage capacity. Dacia Logan has 270 litres more trunk space than the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Dacia Logan is 0.3 metres more than that of the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`740 kg | 1`915 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | Dacia Logan has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Scenic has serious deffects in 65 percent more cases than Dacia Logan, so Dacia Logan quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Dacia Logan has
|
Renault Scenic has
| |