Renault Megane 2000 vs Mitsubishi Carisma 1997
| 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 | 137 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 12.1 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 7 HP more power than Mitsubishi Carisma, whereas torque is 11 NM more than Mitsubishi Carisma. Thanks to more power Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 2.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 7.2 | |
| Renault Megane consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mitsubishi Carisma, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 1050 km on highway | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 560'000 km | 420'000 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: | 27 years | 15 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | Used also on Mitsubishi Lancer | |
| 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. | |||
| 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 particularly demanding on fuel quality.
The most critical ... More about Renault Megane 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.48 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.71 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.40 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Megane is 4 cm shorter than the Mitsubishi Carisma, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Megane is 2 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 510 litres | 460 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
1310 litres | 460 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Mitsubishi Carisma 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 850 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.3 metres more than that of the Mitsubishi Carisma. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`600 kg | 1`630 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`085 kg | 1`185 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 515 kg | 445 kg | |
| Renault Megane load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 14 procentiem more than Mitsubishi Carisma. Therefore, Renault Megane is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | below average | average | |
| Mitsubishi Carisma has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 35 percent more cases than Mitsubishi Carisma, so Mitsubishi Carisma quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Mitsubishi Carisma has
| |