Renault Megane 2012 vs Mazda 3 2011
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.6 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 115 HP | |
| Torque: | 260 NM | 270 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.1 seconds | 11 seconds | |
|
Mazda 3 is a more dynamic driving. Renault Megane engine produces 5 HP less power than Mazda 3, whereas torque is 10 NM less than Mazda 3. Due to the lower power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.5 | 4.3 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.2 l/100km | 5.4 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 120 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1710 km in combined cycle | 1270 km in combined cycle | |
| 1870 km on highway | 1440 km on highway | ||
| 1150 km with real consumption | 1010 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. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 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: | 8 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | Used also on Mazda 5 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Mazda 3 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 2012 1.5 engine: The engine has many modifications, is sufficiently common and spare parts are available. The fuel consumption/power ratio is good. The fuel injection system can be a problem and the timing belt change interval ... More about Renault Megane 2012 1.5 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.46 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.47 m | |
| Renault Megane is 16 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 5 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 344 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
991 litres | 1360 litres | |
| Renault Megane has 4 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 (by 369 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.5 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Renault Megane can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`805 | 1`830 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 110 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 4600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |