Renault Megane 2006 vs Mazda 3 2006
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 1.3 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: | 100 HP | 84 HP | |
Torque: | 127 NM | 122 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.7 seconds | 14.9 seconds | |
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 16 HP more power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 5 NM more than Mazda 3. Thanks to more power Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 2.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.8 | 6.7 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 7.1 l/100km | 7.6 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 Mazda 3, 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 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 880 km in combined cycle | 820 km in combined cycle | |
840 km with real consumption | 720 km with real consumption | ||
Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Ground clearance: | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | |
Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Mazda 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
Engine production duration: | 13 years | 13 years | |
Engine spread: | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Renault Modus | Used also on Mazda 2 | |
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. | |||
Mazda 3 2006 1.4 engine: The engine is generally robust, but the use of poor-quality fuel can lead to increased burn formation. Idling speeds tend to be unstable. | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.50 m | 4.49 m | |
Width: | 1.78 m | 1.78 m | |
Height: | 1.46 m | 1.47 m | |
Both cars are similar in size. Renault Megane is 1 cm longer than the Mazda 3, width is practically the same , while the height of Renault Megane is 1 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 520 litres | 413 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1285 litres | |
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Renault Megane has 107 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. | |||
Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.9 meters | |
The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.4 metres less than that of the Mazda 3, which means Renault Megane can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`715 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | low | average | |
Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 30 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
Average price (€): | 1400 | 2600 | |
Rating in user reviews: | 8.3/10 | 8.8/10 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |