About Cars

Renault Megane Rs 265 2014 Vs Citroen C4 Vti 95 2014

0
(0)

Compare the performance and features of the 2014 Renault Megane RS 265 and the 2014 Citroen C4 VTI 95. Discover which of these sporty cars is the better choice for you.

Feature Renault Megane Rs 265 2014 Citroen C4 Vti 95 2014
Engine Type 2.0L Turbocharged Inline-4 1.4L Inline-4
Horsepower 265 hp 95 hp
Torque 360 Nm 135 Nm
Transmission 6-speed manual 5-speed manual
Acceleration (0-100 km/h) 6.0 seconds 12.5 seconds
Top Speed 255 km/h 183 km/h
Fuel Efficiency (Combined) 8.2 L/100km 5.4 L/100km
Front Suspension Independent MacPherson strut Independent MacPherson strut
Rear Suspension Torsion beam Torsion beam
Steering Type Electric power-assisted rack-and-pinion Electric power-assisted rack-and-pinion
Brakes (Front) Ventilated discs Ventilated discs
Brakes (Rear) Solid discs Solid discs
Wheel Size 18 inches 16 inches
Weight 1,395 kg 1,100 kg
Length 4,299 mm 4,276 mm
Width 1,840 mm 1,776 mm
Height 1,425 mm 1,498 mm

Engine Type

The Renault Megane Rs 265 2014 is equipped with a powerful 2.0L Turbocharged Inline-4 engine, providing a thrilling driving experience. On the other hand, the Citroen C4 Vti 95 2014 comes with a smaller 1.4L Inline-4 engine, offering more modest performance.

Horsepower

When it comes to horsepower, the Renault Megane Rs 265 takes the lead with an impressive 265 hp, delivering exhilarating acceleration and speed. In comparison, the Citroen C4 Vti 95 has a horsepower of 95 hp, providing a more relaxed and economical driving experience.

Torque

The Renault Megane Rs 265 boasts a higher torque of 360 Nm, allowing for quick and responsive acceleration. On the other hand, the Citroen C4 Vti 95 has a torque of 135 Nm, which may result in a less powerful and dynamic driving experience.

Transmission

Both cars offer manual transmissions, with the Renault Megane Rs 265 featuring a 6-speed manual and the Citroen C4 Vti 95 equipped with a 5-speed manual. Manual transmissions provide greater control and engagement for driving enthusiasts.

Acceleration (0-100 km/h)

The Renault Megane Rs 265 showcases impressive acceleration, reaching 0-100 km/h in just 6.0 seconds. In contrast, the Citroen C4 Vti 95 has a slower acceleration time of 12.5 seconds, making it more suitable for relaxed driving rather than high-performance.

Top Speed

With its powerful engine, the Renault Megane Rs 265 achieves a top speed of 255 km/h, offering thrilling performance on the roads. The Citroen C4 Vti 95 has a lower top speed of 183 km/h, which may be sufficient for everyday driving needs.

Fuel Efficiency (Combined)

The Citroen C4 Vti 95 excels in fuel efficiency, consuming an average of 5.4 L/100km, making it a more economical choice for daily commuting. In comparison, the Renault Megane Rs 265 has a higher fuel consumption of 8.2 L/100km due to its more powerful engine.

Suspension

Both cars feature independent MacPherson strut front suspension and torsion beam rear suspension, providing a balanced and comfortable ride quality for passengers.

Steering Type

Both the Renault Megane Rs 265 and the Citroen C4 Vti 95 come with electric power-assisted rack-and-pinion steering, offering precise and responsive handling on the road.

Brakes

Both cars are equipped with ventilated discs for the front brakes and solid discs for the rear brakes, ensuring reliable stopping power and effective braking performance.

Wheel Size

The Renault Megane Rs 265 features larger 18-inch wheels, which not only enhance its sporty appearance but also contribute to improved stability and grip on the road. The Citroen C4 Vti 95, on the other hand, comes with 16-inch wheels.

Weight

The Renault Megane Rs 265 has a weight of 1,395 kg, while the Citroen C4 Vti 95 is lighter with a weight of 1,100 kg. The weight of a car can impact its handling, agility, and fuel efficiency.

Dimensions

The Renault Megane Rs 265 has a length of 4,299 mm, width of 1,840 mm, and height of 1,425 mm. The Citroen C4 Vti 95 has slightly smaller dimensions with a length of 4,276 mm, width of 1,776 mm, and height of 1,498 mm.

How useful was this post?

Click on a star to rate it!

Average rating 0 / 5. Vote count: 0

No votes so far! Be the first to rate this post.

Related Articles

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Back to top button
We use cookies in order to give you the best possible experience on our website. By continuing to use this site, you agree to our use of cookies.
Accept