Renault Megane 2009 vs Opel Astra 2010
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 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: | 160 HP | 160 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 9 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is more dynamic to drive. Renault Megane and Opel Astra have the same engine power, but Renault Megane torque is 30 NM more than Opel Astra. Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 0.5 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 4.9 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 6.8 l/100km | 6.5 l/100km | |
|
The Opel Astra is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Renault Megane consumes 1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 150 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Renault Megane consumes 0.3 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Opel Astra. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 56 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1010 km in combined cycle | 1140 km in combined cycle | |
| 1200 km on highway | 1360 km on highway | ||
| 880 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Ground clearance: | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | 160 mm (6.3 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Opel Astra can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. Note, however, that this Opel Astra version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Opel Zafira, Opel Insignia | |
| 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 2009 2.0 engine: The engine has a good power to fuel consumption ratio and, with careful maintenance, a long service life. The most common problems with these engines are with the fuel injection system and lubrication. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.30 m | 4.42 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.51 m | |
|
Renault Megane is smaller. Renault Megane is 12 cm shorter than the Opel Astra, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Megane is 9 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 344 litres | 370 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
377 litres | 1235 litres | |
|
Opel Astra has more luggage space. Renault Megane has 26 litres less trunk space than the Opel Astra. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Opel Astra (by 858 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 11.4 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.4 metres less than that of the Opel Astra, which means Renault Megane can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`872 | 2`065 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | low | average | |
| Opel Astra has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 45 percent more cases than Opel Astra, so Opel Astra quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 3600 | 3600 | |
| Rating in user reviews: | 8.0/10 | 8.3/10 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Opel Astra has
| |