Renault Megane 2003 vs Toyota Corolla 2002
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 136 HP | 192 HP | |
| Torque: | 191 NM | 180 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.9 seconds | 8.4 seconds | |
|
Toyota Corolla is a more dynamic driving. Renault Megane engine produces 56 HP less power than Toyota Corolla, but torque is 11 NM more than Toyota Corolla. Due to the lower power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 2.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.4 | 8.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 9.7 l/100km | 8.7 l/100km | |
|
The Toyota Corolla is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 15 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 710 km in combined cycle | 660 km in combined cycle | |
| 920 km on highway | 820 km on highway | ||
| 610 km with real consumption | 630 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 280'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Renault Megane engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Espace | Used also on Toyota Celica | |
| 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 Renault Megane 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 Megane 2003 2.0 engine: The F4R 2.0 engine is a relatively simple and reliable unit, capable of lasting up to 400,000 km with proper maintenance. Its design is straightforward, and service is generally accessible. However, several recurring issues ... More about Renault Megane 2003 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.21 m | 4.18 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.48 m | |
|
Renault Megane is larger, but slightly lower. Renault Megane is 3 cm longer than the Toyota Corolla, 7 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 2 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 330 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1190 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.2 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.3 metres more than that of the Toyota Corolla. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`805 | 1`200 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Toyota Corolla has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Toyota Corolla, so Toyota Corolla quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1200 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Toyota Corolla has
| |