Opel Combo 2012 vs Renault Kangoo 2013
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 105 HP | 86 HP | |
| Torque: | 290 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.4 seconds | 13.3 seconds | |
| Opel Combo engine produces 19 HP more power than Renault Kangoo, whereas torque is 90 NM more than Renault Kangoo. Despite the higher power, Opel Combo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.6 | 4.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.7 l/100km | 6.0 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Kangoo is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Opel Combo consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Kangoo, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Opel Combo could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Opel Combo consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Kangoo. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1070 km in combined cycle | 1300 km in combined cycle | |
| 1150 km on highway | 1420 km on highway | ||
| 890 km with real consumption | 1000 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Kangoo 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: | 10 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Fiat Bravo | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Kangoo might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Opel Combo 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 Kangoo 2013 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Renault Kangoo 2013 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.74 m | 4.21 m | |
| Width: | 1.83 m | 1.83 m | |
| Height: | 1.88 m | 1.80 m | |
|
Opel Combo is larger. Opel Combo is 53 cm longer than the Renault Kangoo, width is practically the same , while the height of Opel Combo is 8 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 790 litres | 660 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
3200 litres | 2600 litres | |
|
Opel Combo has more luggage capacity. Opel Combo has 130 litres more trunk space than the Renault Kangoo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Opel Combo (by 600 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Combo is 0.5 metres more than that of the Renault Kangoo, which means Opel Combo can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`030 | 1`954 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Renault Kangoo is better rated in child safety tests. The Renault Kangoo scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 4600 | 9400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Combo has
|
Renault Kangoo has
| |