Volvo V40 2012 vs Renault Megane 2016
| Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 1.6 Diesel | 1.5 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 115 HP | 110 HP | |
| Torque: | 270 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.3 seconds | 11.3 seconds | |
| Volvo V40 engine produces 5 HP more power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 20 NM more than Renault Megane. Despite the higher power, Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 1 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 3.6 | 3.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 5.0 l/100km | 5.4 l/100km | |
|
The Volvo V40 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Volvo V40 consumes 0.1 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane, which means that by driving the Volvo V40 over 15,000 km in a year you can save 15 litres of fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Volvo V40 consumes 0.4 litres less fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 62 litres | 47 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 1720 km in combined cycle | 1270 km in combined cycle | |
| 1820 km on highway | 1380 km on highway | ||
| 1240 km with real consumption | 870 km with real consumption | ||
| Volvo V40 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
| Ground clearance: | 133 mm (5.2 inches) | 145 mm (5.7 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, Renault Megane 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 Megane version does not have 4x4 drive, which is very important in poor road conditions. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 13 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including Volvo V70, Volvo S80, Volvo S60, Volvo S40, Volvo V60 | Installed on at least 16 other car models, including Nissan Qashqai, Renault Scenic, 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 Volvo V40 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. | |||
| Volvo V40 2012 1.6 engine: The main issues reported by owners are frequent oil and coolant leaks. The Siemens fuel system with piezo injectors is highly sensitive to fuel quality, requiring the use of high-grade diesel to avoid ... More about Volvo V40 2012 1.6 engine 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: | 4.37 m | 4.36 m | |
| Width: | 1.80 m | 1.81 m | |
| Height: | 1.44 m | 1.45 m | |
| Both cars are similar in size. Volvo V40 is 1 cm longer than the Renault Megane, 1 cm narrower, while the height of Volvo V40 is 1 cm lower. | |||
| Trunk capacity: | 335 litres | 384 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
no data | 1247 litres | |
|
Renault Megane has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volvo V40 has 49 litres less trunk space than the Renault Megane. This could mean that the Volvo V40 uses more space in the cabin, so the driver and passengers could be more spacious and comfortable. | |||
| Turning diameter: | 11.2 meters | 11.2 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 1`890 | 1`848 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | above average | above average | |
| Average price (€): | 8200 | 11 200 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Renault Megane has
| |