Volkswagen Bora 1999 vs Renault Megane 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 102 HP | |
| Torque: | 285 NM | 200 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11 seconds | 12 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Bora is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Bora engine produces 13 HP more power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 85 NM more than Renault Megane. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Bora reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.3 | 5.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 5.5 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Volkswagen Bora consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that by driving the Volkswagen Bora 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, Volkswagen Bora consumes 0.4 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 55 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 1110 km in combined cycle | |
| 1240 km on highway | 1360 km on highway | ||
| 930 km with real consumption | 1090 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 3 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A6, Audi A4 | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Megane might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Volkswagen Bora 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. | |||
| Volkswagen Bora 1999 1.9 engine: The engine is very demanding when it comes to oil quality and using poor quality lubricants will significantly reduce engine life. Renault Megane 2000 1.9 engine: Long-lasting and fuel-efficient engine. Maintaining oil change and maintenance intervals is essential for a long engine life, as poor or untimely oil changes can result in turbine and oil pump damage, followed ... More about Renault Megane 2000 1.9 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.41 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.74 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.47 m | 1.42 m | |
| Volkswagen Bora is 3 cm shorter than the Renault Megane, 4 cm wider, while the height of Volkswagen Bora is 5 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 460 litres | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1285 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage space. Volkswagen Bora has 25 litres less trunk space than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Bora is 0.3 metres more than that of the Renault Megane. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`880 | 1`745 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 1200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Bora has
|
Renault Megane has
| |