Renault Megane 2000 vs Volvo S40 1996
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.7 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 107 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 165 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 11 seconds | |
| Renault Megane engine produces 8 HP less power than Volvo S40, whereas torque is 17 NM less than Volvo S40. Despite less power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1.2 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 8.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 8.7 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 1.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 240 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 1.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Volvo S40. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 690 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 680 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 | 440'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 26 years | 4 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | Used also on Volvo V40 | |
| 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 S40 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 S40, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Megane is 1 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 510 litres | 471 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1310 litres | 853 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, Renault Megane has 39 litres more trunk space than the Volvo S40. The Volvo S40 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 457 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.3 metres less than that of the Volvo S40. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`600 | 1`720 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Renault Megane has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Volvo S40 has serious deffects in 25 percent more cases than Renault Megane, so Renault Megane quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Volvo S40 has
| |