Renault Scenic 2006 vs BMW 5 series 2000
| Body: | Minivan / MPV | Sedan | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 136 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 280 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.4 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is more dynamic to drive. Renault Scenic engine produces 14 HP more power than BMW 5 series, whereas torque is 60 NM more than BMW 5 series. Thanks to more power Renault Scenic reaches 100 km/h speed 1.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 6.3 l/100km | |
|
The BMW 5 series is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Scenic consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 5 series, which means that by driving the Renault Scenic over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Scenic consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW 5 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 1180 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1480 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 1110 km with real consumption | ||
| BMW 5 series gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
| Front-wheel drive cars (Renault Scenic) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW 5 series) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 9 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Opel Vivaro | Used also on BMW 3 sērija | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Scenic might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Renault Scenic 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: | 4.26 m | 4.78 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.44 m | |
| Renault Scenic is 52 cm shorter than the BMW 5 series, width is practically the same , while the height of Renault Scenic is 18 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 460 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1840 litres | no data | |
|
BMW 5 series has more luggage space. Renault Scenic has 30 litres less trunk space than the BMW 5 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Scenic is 0.3 metres less than that of the BMW 5 series. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`025 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | Renault Scenic has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 5 series has serious deffects in 140 percent more cases than Renault Scenic, so Renault Scenic quality is probably significantly better | ||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 5200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 5.4/10 | 7.9/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Scenic has
|
BMW 5 sērija has
| |