Renault Megane 2016 vs Renault Kadjar 2015
| Body: | Sedan | Crossover / SUV | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Crossovers and SUVs have better off-road capabilities (higher ground clearance, can have 4x4 drive), they are preferable for driving on unpaved roads and rural areas. Also, the driver's seating position is higher in a crossover or SUVs, which provides better visibility also in city. This usually comes at the cost of higher fuel consumption, increased weight and higher maintenance costs. | |||
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 260 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.7 seconds | 11.9 seconds | |
|
Renault Kadjar is a more dynamic driving. Renault Megane engine produces 20 HP less power than Renault Kadjar, whereas torque is 40 NM less than Renault Kadjar. Due to the lower power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 1.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.7 | 3.8 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.7 l/100km | 5.5 l/100km | |
|
The Renault Kadjar is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Renault Megane consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Kadjar, which means that by driving the Renault Megane over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Megane consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Kadjar. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 49 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1320 km in combined cycle | 1570 km in combined cycle | |
| 1440 km on highway | 1660 km on highway | ||
| 850 km with real consumption | 1090 km with real consumption | ||
| Renault Kadjar gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 136 mm (5.4 inches) | 200 mm (7.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Renault Kadjar 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 Renault Kadjar version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 12 years | 8 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 16 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster | Installed on at least 22 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Dacia Duster, Nissan Juke | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.45 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.84 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.61 m | |
| Renault Megane is 18 cm longer than the Renault Kadjar, 2 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Megane is 16 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 472 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1478 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Renault Megane has 78 litres more trunk space than the Renault Kadjar. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.6 metres more than that of the Renault Kadjar, which means Renault Megane can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`852 | 1`916 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Renault Megane has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Kadjar has serious deffects in 15 percent more cases than Renault Megane, so Renault Megane quality is probably better | |||
| Average price (€): | 11 200 | 12 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Renault Kadjar has
| |