Renault Trafic 2011 vs Volkswagen Sharan 2010
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.0 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: | 90 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 19 seconds | 10.9 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Sharan is a more dynamic driving. Renault Trafic engine produces 50 HP less power than Volkswagen Sharan, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Volkswagen Sharan. Due to the lower power, Renault Trafic reaches 100 km/h speed 8.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.6 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 7.1 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen Sharan is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Trafic consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Sharan, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Trafic could require 165 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Trafic consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Sharan. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 90 litres | 70 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1360 km in combined cycle | 1270 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1450 km on highway | ||
| 1110 km with real consumption | 980 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 19 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Opel Vivaro, Nissan Primastar | Installed on at least 12 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.78 m | 4.85 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.90 m | |
| Height: | 1.94 m | 1.74 m | |
| Renault Trafic is 7 cm shorter than the Volkswagen Sharan, width is practically the same , while the height of Renault Trafic is 20 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 1240 litres | 809 litres | |
|
Renault Trafic has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Renault Trafic has 431 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Sharan. The Volkswagen Sharan may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.8 meters | 11.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Trafic is 0.1 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Sharan. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`790 | 2`340 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Volkswagen Sharan scores higher in safety tests, butRenault Trafic is better rated in child safety tests. The Volkswagen Sharan scores higher in active safety technologies (stability control, lane assist, automatic braking, etc.) tests. | |||
| Quality: | no data | low | |
| Average price (€): | 15 600 | 15 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Trafic has
|
Volkswagen Sharan has
| |