Renault Megane 2006 vs Audi TT 2008
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 130 HP | 170 HP | |
| Torque: | 300 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.6 seconds | 7.7 seconds | |
|
Audi TT is a more dynamic driving. Renault Megane engine produces 40 HP less power than Audi TT, whereas torque is 50 NM less than Audi TT. Due to the lower power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.8 | 5.5 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.9 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Audi TT, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 45 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Megane consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Audi TT. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1030 km in combined cycle | 1090 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 1330 km on highway | ||
| 1010 km with real consumption | 960 km with real consumption | ||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | Front wheel drive (FWD) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.36 m | 4.18 m | |
| Width: | 1.78 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.40 m | 1.36 m | |
| Renault Megane is 18 cm longer than the Audi TT, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Megane is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 190 litres | 250 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
490 litres | no data | |
|
Audi TT has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, This could mean that the Renault Megane uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.2 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.8 metres less than that of the Audi TT, which means Renault Megane can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Power steering: | Electric power steering | Hydraulic power steering | |
| Electric power steering is simpler, quieter, more fuel-efficient, more configurable and provides additional features such as auto-steering for lane assist and parking. The disadvantages of electric power steering are possible overheating under prolonged load conditions and insufficient feedback (feeling) during steering. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`880 kg | 1`735 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`425 kg | 1`415 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 455 kg | 320 kg | |
| Renault Megane load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 30 procentiem more than Audi TT. Therefore, Renault Megane is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | below average | high | |
| Audi TT has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 75 percent more cases than Audi TT, so Audi TT quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 2400 | 9800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Audi TT has
| |