2009 Mazda BT-50 vs. 2003 Renault Megane
To start off, 2009 Mazda BT-50 is newer by 6 year(s). Which means there will be less support and parts availability for 2003 Renault Megane. In addition, the cost of maintenance, including insurance, on 2003 Renault Megane would be higher. At 2,500 cc (4 cylinders), 2009 Mazda BT-50 is equipped with a bigger engine. In terms of performance, 2009 Mazda BT-50 (141 HP @ 3500 RPM) has 7 more horse power than 2003 Renault Megane. (134 HP @ 5500 RPM). In normal driving conditions, 2009 Mazda BT-50 should accelerate faster than 2003 Renault Megane. With that said, vehicle weight also plays an important factor in acceleration. 2009 Mazda BT-50 weights approximately 436 kg more than 2003 Renault Megane. So despite on having greater horse power, its additional weight may have an impact towards its acceleration in comparison.
Because 2009 Mazda BT-50 is four wheel drive (4WD), it will have significant more traction and grip than 2003 Renault Megane. In wet, icy, snow, or gravel driving conditions, 2009 Mazda BT-50 will offer significantly more control. 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, 2009 Mazda BT-50 (330 Nm @ 1800 RPM) has 142 more torque (in Nm) than 2003 Renault Megane. (188 Nm @ 3750 RPM). This means 2009 Mazda BT-50 will have an easier job in driving up hills or pulling heavy equipment than 2003 Renault Megane. 2003 Renault Megane has automatic transmission and 2009 Mazda BT-50 has manual transmission. 2009 Mazda BT-50 will offer better control over acceleration and deceleration in addition to better fuel efficiency overall. 2003 Renault Megane will be easier to drive especially in heavy traffic.
Compare all specifications:
| 2009 Mazda BT-50 | 2003 Renault Megane | |
| Make | Mazda | Renault |
| Model | BT-50 | Megane |
| Year Released | 2009 | 2003 |
| Body Type | Pickup | Convertible |
| Engine Position | Front | Front |
| Engine Size | 2500 cc | 1997 cc |
| Engine Cylinders | 4 cylinders | 4 cylinders |
| Engine Type | in-line | in-line |
| Valves per Cylinder | 4 valves | 4 valves |
| Horse Power | 141 HP | 134 HP |
| Engine RPM | 3500 RPM | 5500 RPM |
| Torque | 330 Nm | 188 Nm |
| Torque RPM | 1800 RPM | 3750 RPM |
| Engine Bore Size | 93 mm | 82.7 mm |
| Engine Stroke Size | 92 mm | 93 mm |
| Engine Compression Ratio | 18.0:1 | 9.8:1 |
| Top Speed | 158 km/hour | 200 km/hour |
| Acceleration 0-100mph | 12.5 seconds | 11.5 seconds |
| Drive Type | 4WD | Front |
| Transmission Type | Manual | Automatic |
| Number of Seats | 5 seats | 4 seats |
| Number of Doors | 4 doors | 2 doors |
| Vehicle Weight | 1866 kg | 1430 kg |
| Vehicle Length | 5080 mm | 4360 mm |
| Vehicle Width | 1810 mm | 1780 mm |
| Vehicle Height | 1750 mm | 1410 mm |
| Wheelbase Size | 3010 mm | 2620 mm |
| Fuel Consumption Overall | 8.9 L/100km | 8.4 L/100km |
| Fuel Tank Capacity | 70 L | 60 L |
