Renault Megane 2000 vs Volkswagen Polo 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 107 HP | 100 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 145 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 11.1 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 7 HP more power than Volkswagen Polo, whereas torque is 3 NM more than Volkswagen Polo. Thanks to more power Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 8.0 | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Renault Megane consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Polo, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 45 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 560 km in combined cycle | |
| 1010 km on highway | 720 km on highway | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 480'000 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 Volkswagen Polo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 26 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Seat Ibiza, Seat Toledo | |
| 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: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen Polo 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 2000 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 Megane 2000 1.6 engine Volkswagen Polo 2000 1.6 engine: This is a simple and reliable engine with an impressive lifespan when properly maintained. However, many of its issues stem from air leaks, so checking hoses and the intake manifold is essential. The ignition ... More about Volkswagen Polo 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.14 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.46 m | |
|
Renault Megane is larger, but slightly lower. Renault Megane is 30 cm longer than the Volkswagen Polo, 6 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 4 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 485 litres | 390 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1600 litres | 1250 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Renault Megane has 95 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Polo. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Megane (by 350 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.2 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Polo. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`695 | 1`550 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Volkswagen Polo has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Renault Megane, so Volkswagen Polo quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Volkswagen Polo has
| |