Renault Megane 2000 vs Chrysler Sebring 2001
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.7 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing chain | |
| Timing belt usually needs to be replaced more often than the chain, but it is usually significantly cheaper. Timing belt motors are generally quieter and less vibrating than chain motors. | |||
Performance | |||
| Power: | 110 HP | 203 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 262 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.1 seconds | 11.4 seconds | |
| Renault Megane engine produces 93 HP less power than Chrysler Sebring, whereas torque is 114 NM less than Chrysler Sebring. Despite less power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1.3 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.0 | 10.6 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 7.2 l/100km | 10.3 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 3.6 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Sebring, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 540 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 3.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Chrysler Sebring. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 850 km in combined cycle | 560 km in combined cycle | |
| 1050 km on highway | 730 km on highway | ||
| 830 km with real consumption | 580 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: | 560'000 km | 460'000 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 Megane engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 27 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Chrysler 300C, Chrysler 300M, Dodge Intrepid | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Megane might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The Chrysler Sebring 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 2000 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 Megane 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.08 m | 4.92 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.76 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.40 m | |
|
Renault Megane is smaller. Renault Megane is 84 cm shorter than the Chrysler Sebring, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Megane is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 281 litres | 320 litres | |
|
Chrysler Sebring has more luggage space. Renault Megane has 39 litres less trunk space than the Chrysler Sebring. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 11 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.5 metres less than that of the Chrysler Sebring, which means Renault Megane can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`560 kg | 1`990 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`125 kg | 1`585 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 435 kg | 405 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 2600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Chrysler Sebring has
| |