Renault Megane 2006 vs Volvo V50 2006
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 2.0 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: | 135 HP | 145 HP | |
| Torque: | 191 NM | 185 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.7 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
| Renault Megane engine produces 10 HP less power than Volvo V50, but torque is 6 NM more than Volvo V50. Due to the lower power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 0.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 7.4 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 7.5 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V50 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V50, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 90 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V50. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 750 km in combined cycle | 740 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km with real consumption | 730 km with real consumption | ||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 6 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S40, Volvo C30 | |
| 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.50 m | 4.51 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.77 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.45 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Megane is 1 cm shorter than the Volvo V50, 1 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 520 litres | 417 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1600 litres | 1307 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Renault Megane has 103 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V50. The Volvo V50 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Megane (by 293 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.4 metres more than that of the Volvo V50, which means Renault Megane can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`870 | 1`850 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Volvo V50 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Volvo V50, so Volvo V50 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 1600 | 2200 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.3/10 | 6.4/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Volvo V50 has
| |