Renault Megane 2001 vs Renault Clio 2001
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 138 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 191 NM | 148 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.6 seconds | 9.6 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 28 HP more power than Renault Clio, whereas torque is 43 NM more than Renault Clio. Thanks to more power Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.5 | 7.0 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.1 l/100km | 7.4 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Clio is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.5 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 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 0.7 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Clio. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 800 km in combined cycle | 710 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 890 km on highway | ||
| 740 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 370'000 km | 560'000 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 Clio engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 27 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Espace | 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 Megane 2001 2.0 engine: The F4R 2.0 engine is a relatively simple and reliable unit, capable of lasting up to 400,000 km with proper maintenance. Its design is straightforward, and service is generally accessible. However, several recurring issues ... More about Renault Megane 2001 2.0 engine 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 particularly demanding on fuel quality. The most critical ... More about Renault Clio 2001 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 3.97 m | 3.81 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.64 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Renault Megane is larger, but lower. Renault Megane is 16 cm longer than the Renault Clio, 6 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 5 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | no data | 510 litres | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.2 metres less than that of the Renault Clio. | |||
| Gross weight: | no data | 1`500 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | low | |
| Renault Clio has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Renault Megane, so Renault Clio quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Renault Clio has
| |