Renault Scenic 2006 vs Opel Meriva 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 1.7 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 150 HP | 101 HP | |
| Torque: | 340 NM | 240 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.4 seconds | 13.4 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is more dynamic to drive. Renault Scenic engine produces 49 HP more power than Opel Meriva, whereas torque is 100 NM more than Opel Meriva. Thanks to more power Renault Scenic reaches 100 km/h speed 4 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 6.1 l/100km | |
|
The Opel Meriva is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Scenic consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Meriva, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Scenic could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Scenic consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Meriva. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 52 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 980 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 850 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Opel Vivaro | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Opel Astra, Opel Corsa, Opel Combo | |
| 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Renault Scenic 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 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 | 4.04 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Renault Scenic is larger. Renault Scenic is 22 cm longer than the Opel Meriva, 11 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 430 litres | 350 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1840 litres | 1410 litres | |
|
Renault Scenic has more luggage capacity. Renault Scenic has 80 litres more trunk space than the Opel Meriva. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Scenic (by 430 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.5 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Scenic is 0.2 metres more than that of the Opel Meriva. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`025 | 1`910 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Opel Meriva has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Scenic has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Opel Meriva, so Opel Meriva quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 5.4/10 | 7.1/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Scenic has
|
Opel Meriva has
| |