Renault Grand Scenic 2016 vs Volkswagen Sharan 2010
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.4 seconds | 9.8 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Sharan is a more dynamic driving. Renault Grand Scenic engine produces 60 HP less power than Volkswagen Sharan, whereas torque is 90 NM less than Volkswagen Sharan. Due to the lower power, Renault Grand Scenic reaches 100 km/h speed 2.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 4.0 | 5.9 | |
|
The Renault Grand Scenic is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Renault Grand Scenic consumes 1.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Sharan, which means that by driving the Renault Grand Scenic over 15,000 km in a year you can save 285 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 53 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1320 km in combined cycle | 1180 km in combined cycle | |
| 1350 km on highway | 1290 km on highway | ||
| Renault Grand Scenic gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 16 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Renault Megane, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Audi A3, Skoda Superb | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Grand Scenic might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Sharan 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.87 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.66 m | 1.74 m | |
|
Renault Grand Scenic is smaller. Renault Grand Scenic is 22 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Sharan, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Grand Scenic is 8 cm lower. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 533 litres | 809 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 533 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | no data | 809 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1737 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 11.4 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Grand Scenic is 0.5 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Sharan, which means Renault Grand Scenic can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`250 | 2`370 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 13 000 | 14 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Grand Scenic has
|
Volkswagen Sharan has
| |