Renault Megane 2016 vs Tesla Model 3 2019
| Comparing electrical vehicle (EV) with combustion engine (ICE) one is a complex task, but we are doing our best. | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Automatic | |
| Engine: | 1.5 Diesel | Electric | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 90 HP | 325 HP | |
| Torque: | 220 NM | 420 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 13.7 seconds | 5.6 seconds | |
|
Tesla Model 3 is a more dynamic driving. Renault Megane engine produces 235 HP less power than Tesla Model 3, whereas torque is 200 NM less than Tesla Model 3. Due to the lower power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 8.1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Consumption: | 3.7 l/100km | ||
| Range per fill-up: | 1320 km in combined cycle | 409 km in combined cycle | |
| Renault Megane gets more mileage from one tank of fuel or charge. | |||
| 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) | |
| 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 (Tesla Model 3) 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. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 136 mm (5.4 inches) | 140 mm (5.5 inches) | |
| 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 | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.63 m | 4.69 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.44 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Renault Megane is 6 cm shorter than the Tesla Model 3, 4 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 550 litres | 425 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage capacity. Even though the car is shorter, The Tesla Model 3 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.3 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.5 metres less than that of the Tesla Model 3, which means Renault Megane can be easier to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight: | 1`852 kg | 2`060 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`320 kg | 1`609 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 532 kg | 451 kg | |
| Renault Megane load capacity (permitted cargo and passenger weight) is par apmēram 15 procentiem more than Tesla Model 3. Therefore, Renault Megane is more suitable for longer family trips or transporting heavier loads. | |||
| Safety: | no data | no data | |
| Quality: | average | no data | |
| Average price (€): | no data | 20 600 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Tesla Model 3 has
| |