Mitsubishi Colt 2007 vs Renault Megane 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Petrol engines (Mitsubishi Colt) are generally quieter, smoother, and better suited for short trips due to quicker warm-up times. Diesel (Renault Megane) engines, on the other hand, offer superior fuel efficiency and torque, making them ideal for long-distance driving and heavy loads. Read more: Petrol vs. Diesel: Fuel Economy and Key Differences. | |||
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 109 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 9.5 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is a more dynamic driving. Mitsubishi Colt engine produces 41 HP less power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 195 NM less than Renault Megane. Due to the lower power, Mitsubishi Colt reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 5.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.0 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mitsubishi Colt could require 135 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mitsubishi Colt consumes 0.9 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 47 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 870 km on highway | 1250 km on highway | ||
| 670 km with real consumption | 980 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 21 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Mitsubishi Lancer, Smart ForFour, Mitsubishi Xpander | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Renault Megane 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 2006 2.0 engine: The engine has a good power to fuel consumption ratio and, with careful maintenance, a long service life. The most common problems with these engines are with the fuel injection system and lubrication. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.88 m | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.78 m | |
| Height: | 1.45 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Mitsubishi Colt is smaller, but higher. Mitsubishi Colt is 49 cm shorter than the Renault Megane, 9 cm narrower, while the height of Mitsubishi Colt is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 190 litres | 190 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 490 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mitsubishi Colt is 0.1 metres less than that of the Renault Megane. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`910 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Mitsubishi Colt has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 20 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Colt, so Mitsubishi Colt quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3000 | 2600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.8/10 | 8.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mitsubishi Colt has
|
Renault Megane has
| |