Volvo V40 2000 vs Renault Megane 2000
Gearbox: | Manual | Manual | |
---|---|---|---|
Engine: | 1.8 Petrol | 1.6 Petrol | |
Camshaft drive: | Timing belt | Timing belt | |
Performance | |||
Power: | 125 HP | 107 HP | |
Torque: | 174 NM | 148 NM | |
Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.5 seconds | 10.3 seconds | |
Volvo V40 engine produces 18 HP more power than Renault Megane, whereas torque is 26 NM more than Renault Megane. Despite the higher power, Volvo V40 reaches 100 km/h speed 0.2 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 6.9 | 7.2 | |
Real fuel consumption: | 8.3 l/100km | 7.2 l/100km | |
The Renault Megane is a better choice in terms of fuel economy based on user-reported consumption, although the specification shows otherwise. By specification Volvo V40 consumes 0.3 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 45 litres of fuel. But when we compare the real fuel consumption reported by users, Volvo V40 consumes 1.1 litres more fuel per 100 km than the Renault Megane. | |||
Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 60 litres | |
Full fuel tank distance: | 860 km in combined cycle | 830 km in combined cycle | |
1050 km on highway | 1010 km on highway | ||
720 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
Read the article "Fuel Efficiency: How to Reduce Fuel Consumption" to learn more about fuel economy. | |||
Engines | |||
Average engine lifespan: | 350'000 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 Renault Megane engine could be longer. | |||
Engine production duration: | 23 years | 26 years | |
Engine spread: | Installed on at least 4 other car models, including Volvo S40, Mitsubishi Carisma, Mitsubishi Galant | 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 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. | |||
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: | 4.48 m | 4.44 m | |
Width: | 1.72 m | 1.70 m | |
Height: | 1.41 m | 1.42 m | |
Both cars are similar in size. Volvo V40 is 4 cm longer than the Renault Megane, 2 cm wider, while the height of Volvo V40 is 1 cm lower. | |||
Trunk capacity: | 413 litres | 485 litres | |
Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1420 litres | 1600 litres | |
Renault Megane has more luggage space. Despite its longer length, Volvo V40 has 72 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. The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Renault Megane (by 180 litres). | |||
Turning diameter: | 10.6 meters | 10.7 meters | |
The turning circle of the Volvo V40 is 0.1 metres less than that of the Renault Megane. | |||
Gross weight (kg): | 1`770 | 1`695 | |
Safety: | no data | ||
Quality: | below average | below average | |
Renault Megane has slightly fewer faults. Deffect rate in annual technical inspection is similar for both cars, it's slightly higher for Volvo V40, so Renault Megane quality could be a bit better. | |||
Average price (€): | 800 | 1000 | |
Pros and Cons: |
Volvo V40 has
|
Renault Megane has
| |