Mazda 3 2006 vs Renault Megane 2006

 
Mazda 3
2006 - 2009
Renault Megane
2006 - 2008
Gearbox: ManualManual
Engine: 1.6 Petrol1.6 Petrol
Camshaft drive: Timing beltTiming belt

Performance

Power: 105 HP110 HP
Torque: 145 NM151 NM
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: 11 seconds11.1 seconds
Mazda 3 engine produces 5 HP less power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 6 NM less than Renault Megane. Despite less power, Mazda 3 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds faster.

Fuel consumption

Fuel consumption (l/100km): 7.26.8
Real fuel consumption: 7.9 l/100km7.4 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 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane.
Fuel tank capacity: 55 litres60 litres
Full fuel tank distance: 760 km in combined cycle880 km in combined cycle
910 km on highway1070 km on highway
690 km with real consumption810 km with real consumption
Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank.
Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy.
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

Average engine lifespan: 420'000 km420'000 km
Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used.
Engine production duration: 16 years26 years
Engine spread: Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda Xedos 6, Mazda MX-3Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, 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 Megane might be a better choice in this respect.
Hydraulic tappets: yesno
The Mazda 3 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.
Mazda 3 2006 1.6 engine: This engine is widely regarded as reliable, though it can develop certain issues over time. One of the most common problems is increased oil consumption, often starting after 120,000 km. This is frequently ...  More about Mazda 3 2006 1.6 engine 

Renault Megane 2006 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 ...  More about Renault Megane 2006 1.6 engine 

Dimensions

Length: 4.49 m4.50 m
Width: 1.76 m1.78 m
Height: 1.47 m1.46 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 litres520 litres
Trunk max capacity:
with rear seats folded down
1285 litresno data
Renault Megane has more luggage space.
Mazda 3 has 107 litres less trunk space than the Renault Megane.
Turning diameter: 10.9 meters10.7 meters
The turning circle of the Mazda 3 is 0.2 metres more than that of the Renault Megane.
Gross weight (kg): 1`7101`750
Safety: no data
Quality:
below average

low
Mazda 3 has fewer problems.
According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably better
Average price (€): 22001200
Rating in user reviews: 8.8/10 8.3/10
Pros and Cons: Mazda 3 has
  • higher ground clearance
  • fewer faults
Renault Megane has
  • lower fuel consumption
  • more full fuel tank mileage
  • roomier boot
  • lower price
Share these results to social networks or e-mail
Contact us: info@auto-abc.lv