Volkswagen Polo 2000 vs Renault Megane 2000
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 100 HP | 107 HP | |
| Torque: | 145 NM | 148 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 11.1 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
|
Renault Megane is a more dynamic driving. Volkswagen Polo engine produces 7 HP less power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 3 NM less than Renault Megane. Due to the lower power, Volkswagen Polo reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 8.0 | 7.2 | |
|
The Renault Megane is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. Volkswagen Polo consumes 0.8 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Polo could require 120 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 45 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 560 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
| 720 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
| Renault Megane gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Engines | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 420'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Volkswagen Polo engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 11 years | 26 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 5 other car models, including Volkswagen Golf, Skoda Octavia, Seat Ibiza, Seat Toledo | Installed on at least 7 other car models, including Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Renault Clio, Dacia Duster | |
| 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: | yes | no | |
| The Volkswagen Polo 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. | |||
| Volkswagen Polo 2000 1.6 engine: This is a simple and reliable engine with an impressive lifespan when properly maintained. However, many of its issues stem from air leaks, so checking hoses and the intake manifold is essential. The ignition ... More about Volkswagen Polo 2000 1.6 engine Renault Megane 2000 1.6 engine: The engine is very robust and long-lived, up to half a million kilometres, and can suffer minor damage, but overall it is quite reliable. Fuel consumption is relatively high for these engines, but they are not ... More about Renault Megane 2000 1.6 engine | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.14 m | 4.44 m | |
| Width: | 1.64 m | 1.70 m | |
| Height: | 1.46 m | 1.42 m | |
|
Volkswagen Polo is smaller, but slightly higher. Volkswagen Polo is 30 cm shorter than the Renault Megane, 6 cm narrower, while the height of Volkswagen Polo is 4 cm higher. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 390 litres | 485 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1250 litres | 1600 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage space. Volkswagen Polo has 95 litres less trunk space than the Renault Megane. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Megane (by 350 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 10.9 meters | 10.7 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Polo is 0.2 metres more than that of the Renault Megane. | |||
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`550 | 1`695 | |
| Safety: | |||
| Quality: | above average | average | |
| Volkswagen Polo has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Renault Megane, so Volkswagen Polo quality could be a bit better. | |||
| Average price (€): | 1800 | 1000 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Polo has
|
Renault Megane has
| |