Mazda Premacy 2001 vs Renault Scenic 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 152 NM | 152 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.9 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
| Mazda Premacy engine produces 15 HP less power than Renault Scenic, the torque is the same for both cars. Despite less power, Mazda Premacy reaches 100 km/h speed 0.6 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.9 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Scenic is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Mazda Premacy consumes 1.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Mazda Premacy could require 180 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Mazda Premacy consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 58 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 690 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 840 km on highway | 1000 km on highway | ||
| 650 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Scenic 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: | 560'000 km | 560'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 27 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mazda 626, Mazda 323 | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | |
| 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 2003 1.6 engine: The engine is very robust and long-lived, up to half a million kilometres, and can suffer minor damage, but overall it is quite reliable. Fuel consumption is relatively high for these engines, but they are not particularly demanding on fuel quality.
The most critical ... More about Renault Scenic 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.34 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.60 m | 1.62 m | |
| Mazda Premacy is 8 cm longer than the Renault Scenic, 10 cm narrower, while the height of Mazda Premacy is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 420 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1848 litres | 1840 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.8 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Mazda Premacy is 0.1 metres more than that of the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Power steering: | Hydraulic power steering | Electric power steering | |
| Hydraulic power steering is technologically more complex, louder, increases fuel consumption and requires more servicing. It has the advantages of more power, less strain on the car's electrical system and better feedback (feeling) when steering. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`760 kg | 1`915 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`250 kg | 1`320 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 510 kg | 595 kg | |
| Mazda Premacy load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 17 procentiem less than Renault Scenic. Therefore, Renault Scenic is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | low | |
| Mazda Premacy has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Scenic has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Mazda Premacy, so Mazda Premacy quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.5/10 | 5.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Mazda Premacy has
|
Renault Scenic has
| |