Renault Megane 2000 vs Honda S2000 1999
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 2.0 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 | 240 HP | |
| Torque: | 148 NM | 208 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 6.2 seconds | |
|
Honda S2000 is a more dynamic driving. Renault Megane engine produces 130 HP less power than Honda S2000, whereas torque is 60 NM less than Honda S2000. Due to the lower power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 6.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.1 | 9.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.4 l/100km | 10.1 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 2.8 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda S2000, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 420 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 1.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Honda S2000. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 840 km in combined cycle | 500 km in combined cycle | |
| 1070 km on highway | 630 km on highway | ||
| 710 km with real consumption | 490 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 (Honda S2000) 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: | 420'000 km | 280'000 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: | 26 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | Used only for this car | |
| 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. | |||
| 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 ... More about Renault Megane 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.08 m | 4.14 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.75 m | |
| Height: | 1.37 m | 1.28 m | |
|
Renault Megane is smaller, but higher. Renault Megane is 6 cm shorter than the Honda S2000, 5 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Megane is 9 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 281 litres | no data | |
| Turning diameter: | 10.5 meters | 10.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.3 metres less than that of the Honda S2000. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`590 | 1`220 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 1000 | 23 000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Honda S2000 has
| |