Renault Megane 2010 vs BMW 3 series 2007
Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 3.0 Petrol | |
Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 130 HP | 306 HP | |
Torque: | 190 NM | 400 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 6 seconds | |
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Renault Megane engine produces 176 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 210 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 3.6 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 9.9 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 11.3 l/100km | |
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 2.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 390 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 3.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 63 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 630 km in combined cycle | |
1030 km on highway | 860 km on highway | ||
750 km with real consumption | 550 km with real consumption | ||
Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Front-wheel drive cars (Renault Megane) have better traction on slippery roads and when climbing hills, better fuel economy, and are less expensive to purchase. On the disadvantage side, FWD cars usually have less towing capacity, poorer acceleration and harder handling. Rear-wheel drive cars (BMW 3 series) have better handling on dry roads, better acceleration, more even weight distribution and more fun to drive. RWD is also better for towing large loads. The cons of rear-wheel drive are less interior and trunk space and more difficulty maneuvering in wet and snowy conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 350'000 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 BMW 3 series engine could be longer. | |||
Engine production duration: | 7 years | 10 years | |
Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Grand Scenic | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW X6, BMW Z4 | |
In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW 3 series might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
The BMW 3 series 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. | |||
Dimensions | |||
Length: | 4.49 m | 4.58 m | |
Width: | 1.81 m | 1.78 m | |
Height: | 1.43 m | 1.38 m | |
Renault Megane is 10 cm shorter than the BMW 3 series, 3 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 5 cm higher. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 211 litres | 210 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 350 litres | |
Renault Megane has 1 litres more trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 11 meters | |
The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.1 metres less than that of the BMW 3 series. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 1`865 | 2`180 | |
Safety: | no data | no data | |
Quality: | below average | average | |
BMW 3 series has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than BMW 3 series, so BMW 3 series quality is probably slightly better | |||
Average price (€): | 8600 | 9600 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |