Renault Megane 2012 vs Mazda 3 2013
| Body: | Coupe | Hatchback | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
| Engine: | 2.0 Diesel | 2.2 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 160 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 380 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 8.5 seconds | 8.1 seconds | |
| Renault Megane engine produces 10 HP more power than Mazda 3, the torque is the same for both cars. Despite the higher power, Renault Megane reaches 100 km/h speed 0.4 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.7 | 4.1 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.6 l/100km | 5.9 l/100km | |
|
By specification Renault Megane consumes 1.6 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Renault Megane could require 240 litres more fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Renault Megane consumes 0.3 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Mazda 3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 51 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1050 km in combined cycle | 1240 km in combined cycle | |
| 1220 km on highway | 1410 km on highway | ||
| 1070 km with real consumption | 860 km with real consumption | ||
| Ground clearance: | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | 155 mm (6.1 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Mazda 3 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 Mazda 3 version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 14 years | 12 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | Used also on Mazda 6, Mazda CX-5 | |
| 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 2012 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 | 4.47 m | |
| Width: | 1.79 m | 1.80 m | |
| Height: | 1.42 m | 1.45 m | |
|
Renault Megane is smaller. Renault Megane is 17 cm shorter than the Mazda 3, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Renault Megane is 3 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 377 litres | 364 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
991 litres | 1263 litres | |
| Even though the car is shorter, Renault Megane has 13 litres more trunk space than the Mazda 3. The Mazda 3 may have more interior space, so the cabin could be more spacious and more comfortable for the driver and passengers. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Mazda 3 (by 272 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11 meters | 10.6 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Renault Megane is 0.4 metres more than that of the Mazda 3, which means Renault Megane can be harder to manoeuvre in tight streets and parking spaces. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`906 | 1`910 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | high | |
| Mazda 3 has fewer problems. According to annual technical inspection data Renault Megane has serious deffects in 110 percent more cases than Mazda 3, so Mazda 3 quality is probably significantly better | |||
| Average price (€): | 7200 | 7000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Renault Megane has
|
Mazda 3 has
| |