Renault Megane 1999 vs Nissan Almera 1998
| Body: | Sedan | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| The hatchback generally has more luggage space thanks to a larger trunk door opening and the ability to convert the rear of the passenger compartment into luggage space. Sedans tend to be quieter than hatchbacks, due to a more isolated rear area. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.9 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 98 HP | 75 HP | |
| Torque: | 200 NM | 132 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 16.8 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane engine produces 23 HP more power than Nissan Almera, whereas torque is 68 NM more than Nissan Almera. Thanks to more power Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 4.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.2 | 6.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.7 l/100km | 6.2 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.9 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 135 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 0.5 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 50 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1150 km in combined cycle | 810 km in combined cycle | |
| 1360 km on highway | 980 km on highway | ||
| 1050 km with real consumption | 800 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: | 420'000 km | 380'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 8 years | 10 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 11 other car models, including Volvo V40, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma | 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 1999 1.9 engine: Long-lasting and fuel-efficient engine. Maintaining oil change and maintenance intervals is essential for a long engine life, as poor or untimely oil changes can result in turbine and oil pump damage, followed ... More about Renault Megane 1999 1.9 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.44 m | 4.14 m | |
| Width: | 1.70 m | 1.69 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Renault Megane is larger. Renault Megane is 30 cm longer than the Nissan Almera, width is practically the same also the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 510 litres | 340 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1310 litres | no data | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Renault Megane has 170 litres more trunk space than the Nissan Almera. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 10.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.9 metres more than that of the Nissan Almera, which means Renault Megane can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`650 | 1`630 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | average | above average | |
| Nissan Almera has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 10 percent more cases than Nissan Almera, so Nissan Almera quality is probably slightly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 600 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Nissan Almera has
| |