Renault Megane 2016 vs BMW 3 series 2015
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| 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: | 90 HP | 190 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 400 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.7 seconds | 7.2 seconds | |
|
BMW 3 series is a more dynamic driving. Renault Megane engine produces 100 HP less power than BMW 3 series, whereas torque is 180 NM less than BMW 3 series. Due to the lower power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 6.5 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.7 | 4.4 | |
| 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 0.7 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW 3 series, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 105 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 BMW 3 series. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 49 litres | 57 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1320 km in combined cycle | 1290 km in combined cycle | |
| 1440 km on highway | 1460 km on highway | ||
| 850 km with real consumption | 910 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) | Rear wheel drive (RWD) | |
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 13 years | 11 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 16 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X3, BMW 2 sērija | |
| 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 BMW 3 series 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 2016 1.5 engine: The engine has undergone numerous modifications and is relatively commonplace, with a plentiful supply of spare parts. It exhibits an optimal fuel consumption/power ratio. However, the fuel injection system ... More about Renault Megane 2016 1.5 engine BMW 3 sērija 2015 2.0 engine: Pretty reliable engine with great resource. Overall, the chains are more reliable than in BMW N-series engines, but also tend to stretch under heavy use. The engine requires good quality fuel, maintenance and ... More about BMW 3 sērija 2015 2.0 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.63 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.43 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Megane and BMW 3 series are practically the same length. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 480 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Renault Megane has 70 litres more trunk space than the BMW 3 series. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.3 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`852 | 2`000 | |
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | above average | below average | |
| Renault Megane has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data BMW 3 series has serious deffects in 55 percent more cases than Renault Megane, so Renault Megane quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 10 800 | 22 400 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
BMW 3 sērija has
| |