2005 MCC Crossblade vs. 1996 Renault Safrane

To start off, 2005 MCC Crossblade is newer by 9 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 1996 Renault Safrane. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 1996 Renault Safrane would be higher. At 1,998 cc (4 cylinders), 1996 Renault Safrane is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 1996 Renault Safrane (141 HP) has 71 more horse power than 2005 MCC Crossblade. (70 HP) In normal driving conditions, 1996 Renault Safrane should accelerate faster than 2005 MCC Crossblade. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 1996 Renault Safrane weights approximately 781 kg more than 2005 MCC Crossblade. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.

Because 2005 MCC Crossblade is rear wheel drive (RWD), it offers better handling in dry conditions; in addition, if you are looking to drift, it will be much easier to do with 2005 MCC Crossblade. However, in wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 1996 Renault Safrane, being front wheel drive (FWD), will offer much better control with better grip. With that said, do keep in mind that many other factors such as speed and the wear on your tires can also have significant impact on traction and control. Let's talk about torque, 1996 Renault Safrane (200 Nm @ 4500 RPM) has 98 more torque (in Nm) than 2005 MCC Crossblade. (102 Nm @ 3210 RPM). This means 1996 Renault Safrane will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2005 MCC Crossblade. 1996 Renault Safrane has automatic transmission and 2005 MCC Crossblade has manual transmission. 2005 MCC Crossblade will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 1996 Renault Safrane will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.

Compare all specifications: