Renault Megane 2000 vs Volvo V40 2000
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.8 Petrol | |
Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 107 HP | 125 HP | |
Torque: | 148 NM | 174 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.3 seconds | 10.5 seconds | |
Renault Megane engine produces 18 HP less power than Volvo V40, whereas torque is 26 NM less than Volvo V40. Despite less power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 6.9 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 8.3 l/100km | |
The Renault Megane is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Megane consumes 1.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo V40. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 860 km in combined cycle | |
1010 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
830 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 350'000 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: | 26 years | 23 years | |
Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma, Mitsubishi Galant | |
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 Volvo V40 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 | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.44 m | 4.48 m | |
Width: | 1.70 m | 1.72 m | |
Height: | 1.42 m | 1.41 m | |
Both cars are similar in size. Renault Megane is 4 cm shorter than the Volvo V40, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Megane is 1 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 485 litres | 413 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1600 litres | 1420 litres | |
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Renault Megane has 72 litres more trunk space than the Volvo V40. The Volvo V40 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 180 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.6 meters | |
The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.1 metres more than that of the Volvo V40. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 1`695 | 1`770 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | below average | below average | |
Renault Megane has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volvo V40, so Renault Megane quality could be a bit better. | |||
Average price (€): | 1000 | 1000 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Volvo V40 has
| |