Opel Meriva 2003 vs Renault Scenic 2003
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 101 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 150 NM | 152 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.3 seconds | 12.5 seconds | |
|
Renault Scenic is a more dynamic driving. Opel Meriva engine produces 14 HP less power than Renault Scenic, whereas torque is 2 NM less than Renault Scenic. Due to the lower power, Opel Meriva reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 7.2 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 8.2 l/100km | |
|
By specification Opel Meriva consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Opel Meriva could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Opel Meriva consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 52 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 890 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. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 440'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 5 years | 26 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Opel Astra, Opel Zafira, Opel Vectra | 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. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | yes | no | |
| The Opel Meriva 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 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 ... More about Renault Scenic 2003 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.04 m | 4.26 m | |
| Width: | 1.69 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.62 m | 1.62 m | |
|
Opel Meriva is smaller. Opel Meriva is 22 cm shorter than the Renault Scenic, 11 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 350 litres | 430 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1410 litres | 1840 litres | |
|
Renault Scenic has more luggage space. Opel Meriva has 80 litres less trunk space than the Renault Scenic. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Scenic (by 430 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Opel Meriva is 0.2 metres less than that of the Renault Scenic. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`830 | 1`915 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | low | |
| 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: | 7.1/10 | 5.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Opel Meriva has
|
Renault Scenic has
| |