Renault Megane 2000 vs Renault Clio 2001
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 158 NM | 148 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.9 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 5 HP more power than Renault Clio, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Renault Clio. Thanks to more power Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.7 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.7 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 105 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 770 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 960 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 770 km with real consumption | 670 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 | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 26 years | |
| Engine spread: | Used also on Renault Scenic | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Clio 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. | |||
| Renault Clio 2001 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 Clio 2001 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 3.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Renault Megane is larger. Renault Megane is 63 cm longer than the Renault Clio, 6 cm wider the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 510 litres | 510 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1310 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.7 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | no data | 1`500 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Renault Megane has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Renault Clio, so Renault Megane quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Renault Clio has
| |