Renault Megane 2000 vs Volkswagen Bora 1999
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 1.9 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 102 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 285 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Bora is a more dynamic driving. Renault Megane engine produces 13 HP less power than Volkswagen Bora, whereas torque is 85 NM less than Volkswagen Bora. Due to the lower power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.4 | 5.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.5 l/100km | 5.9 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 0.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Bora, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 15 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Megane consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen Bora. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1110 km in combined cycle | 1030 km in combined cycle | |
| 1360 km on highway | 1240 km on highway | ||
| 1090 km with real consumption | 930 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 420'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 3 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Audi A6, Audi A4 | |
| 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 Bora 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 1.9 engine: Long-lasting and fuel-efficient engine. Maintaining oil change and maintenance intervals is essential for a long engine life, as poor or untimely oil changes can result in turbine and oil pump damage, followed ... More about Renault Megane 2000 1.9 engine Volkswagen Bora 1999 1.9 engine: The engine is very demanding when it comes to oil quality and using poor quality lubricants will significantly reduce engine life. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.41 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.74 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.47 m | |
| Renault Megane is 3 cm longer than the Volkswagen Bora, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Megane is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 485 litres | 460 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1285 litres | no data | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Renault Megane has 25 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen Bora. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volkswagen Bora. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`745 | 1`880 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 1400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Volkswagen Bora has
| |