Lexus CT 2014 vs Renault Megane 2016
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 99 HP | 90 HP | |
| Torque: | 142 NM | 220 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 13.4 seconds | |
|
Lexus CT is more dynamic to drive. Lexus CT engine produces 9 HP more power than Renault Megane, but torque is 78 NM less than Renault Megane. Thanks to more power Lexus CT reaches 100 km/h speed 3.1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.6 | 3.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.8 l/100km | 5.6 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Lexus CT consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that by driving the Lexus CT over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Lexus CT consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1250 km in combined cycle | 1270 km in combined cycle | |
| 1280 km on highway | 1380 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| Ground clearance: | 130 mm (5.1 inches) | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Renault Megane 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 Renault Megane version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used only for this car | Installed on at least 16 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Lexus CT 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 Megane 2016 1.5 engine: The engine has undergone numerous modifications and is relatively commonplace, with a plentiful supply of spare parts. It exhibits an optimal fuel consumption/power ratio. However, the fuel injection system ... More about Renault Megane 2016 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.35 m | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.77 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Lexus CT is smaller. Lexus CT and Renault Megane are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 375 litres | 384 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
985 litres | 1247 litres | |
| Lexus CT has 9 litres less trunk space than the Renault Megane. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Megane (by 262 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Lexus CT is 0.6 metres less than that of the Renault Megane, which means Lexus CT can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`790 | 1`841 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 14 200 | 11 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Lexus CT has
|
Renault Megane has
| |