Renault Megane 2010 vs Volkswagen EOS 2011
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.4 Petrol | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing belt | |
| Engine chain usually needs to be replaced less often than the timing belt, but the cost of replacing the chain is usually higher. Chain motors are considered to be more reliable, but noisier and more vibration generating. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 HP | 140 HP | |
| Torque: | 190 NM | 320 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
| Renault Megane engine produces 10 HP less power than Volkswagen EOS, whereas torque is 130 NM less than Volkswagen EOS. Despite less power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 0.7 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.3 | 4.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.9 l/100km | 5.9 l/100km | |
|
The Volkswagen EOS is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 2.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen EOS, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 375 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 55 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 820 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 1030 km on highway | 1300 km on highway | ||
| 750 km with real consumption | 930 km with real consumption | ||
| Volkswagen EOS gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 280'000 km | 390'000 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 Volkswagen EOS engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 7 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Renault Scenic, Renault Grand Scenic | Installed on at least 12 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Volkswagen Golf, Volkswagen Sharan, Audi A3 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Volkswagen EOS might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Volkswagen EOS 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. | |||
| Volkswagen EOS 2011 2.0 engine: The engine is very durable and can last a long time with proper maintenance, and is also quite economical for its power. There may be some problems with the turbine geometry. It is important to use good ... More about Volkswagen EOS 2011 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.49 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.79 m | |
| Height: | 1.43 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Megane is 6 cm longer than the Volkswagen EOS, 2 cm wider, while the height of Renault Megane is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 211 litres | 205 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 380 litres | |
| Renault Megane has 6 litres more trunk space than the Volkswagen EOS. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.9 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`865 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | above average | |
| Volkswagen EOS has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 85 percent more cases than Volkswagen EOS, so Volkswagen EOS quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 8600 | 6400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Volkswagen EOS has
| |