Mazda 3 2006 vs Renault Megane 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.4 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 127 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 12.7 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is more dynamic to drive. Mazda 3 engine produces 5 HP more power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 18 NM more than Renault Megane. Thanks to more power Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 1.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 6.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda 3 consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda 3 could require 60 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda 3 consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 760 km in combined cycle | 880 km in combined cycle | |
| 690 km with real consumption | 840 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 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 Mazda 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 16 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3, Kia RIO, Kia Cerato, Kia Carens | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Renault Modus | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Mazda 3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.50 m | |
| Width: | 1.76 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.46 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Mazda 3 is 1 cm shorter than the Renault Megane, 3 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda 3 is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 520 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1285 litres | no data | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage space. Mazda 3 has 107 litres less trunk space than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.4 metres more than that of the Renault Megane, which means Mazda 3 can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`710 | no data | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 1400 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 8.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda 3 has
|
Renault Megane has
| |