Volkswagen Sharan 2010 vs Renault Grand Espace 2012
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.0 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: | 170 HP | 150 HP | |
| Torque: | 350 NM | 340 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 9.8 seconds | 10.6 seconds | |
|
Volkswagen Sharan is more dynamic to drive. Volkswagen Sharan engine produces 20 HP more power than Renault Grand Espace, whereas torque is 10 NM more than Renault Grand Espace. Thanks to more power Volkswagen Sharan reaches 100 km/h speed 0.8 seconds faster. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 5.9 | 5.7 | |
| Volkswagen Sharan consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Grand Espace, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Volkswagen Sharan could require 30 litres more fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 70 litres | 60 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1180 km in combined cycle | 1050 km in combined cycle | |
| 1290 km on highway | 1200 km on highway | ||
| Volkswagen Sharan gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 163 mm (6.4 inches) | 120 mm (4.7 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Volkswagen Sharan 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 Volkswagen Sharan version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 14 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 8 other car models, including Volkswagen Passat, Audi A3, Skoda Superb | Installed on at least 10 other car models, including Nissan X-Trail, Nissan Qashqai, Renault Laguna, Renault Scenic, Opel Vivaro | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. Renault Grand Espace might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
| Renault Grand Espace 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: | 4.85 m | 4.86 m | |
| Width: | 1.90 m | 1.89 m | |
| Height: | 1.74 m | 1.80 m | |
| Volkswagen Sharan and Renault Grand Espace are practically the same length. | |||
| Seats: | 5 seats | 7 seats | |
| Trunk capacity: | 885 litres | 456 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 300 litres | 456 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 885 litres | no data | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down, if possible |
2430 litres | 3050 litres | |
| In 7-seat version Renault Grand Espace has more luggage space (by 156 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Grand Espace (by 620 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.9 meters | 11.8 meters | |
| The turning circle of the Volkswagen Sharan is 0.1 metres more than that of the Renault Grand Espace. | |||
| Gross weight: | 2`370 kg | 2`620 kg | |
| Net weight: | 1`728 kg | 1`931 kg | |
| Load capacity: | 642 kg | 689 kg | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | low | no data | |
| Average price (€): | 10 800 | 5800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volkswagen Sharan has
|
Renault Grand Espace has
| |