Short test: Renault Mégane Berline TCe 115 Energy Dynamique

Instead of a larger naturally aspirated engine, I prefer a smaller turbo engine. History is not new, in fact history just repeats itself. Remember the advent of turbodiesels instead of classic intake diesels? What was “in” a turbodiesel? Now, albeit to a lesser extent, history is repeating itself with gasoline engines.

At Renault, of course, they keep up with the 1,6-liter naturally aspirated gasoline and say goodbye. Not really, you can still find it on the price list, but sooner or later, only turbo petrol will remain on sale. Last but not least, the displacement is one quarter less, the fuel consumption is one quarter less, and the emissions are slightly more power and torque.

It is interesting that it is a thousandth more expensive than the old 1.6 16V (with the same equipment). From a brand that has always tried to emphasize (as well as) the environmental progress of its vehicles, you could expect to easily replace the old engine with a new one at the same price, because by keeping the old one on sale and at a much higher price. in the case of lower equipment packages) they actually decided to put the newcomer in a very unequal position from the very beginning. As if you don't want to sell.

It's a pity, because this is a good automotive product. It can be a little sleepy at the lowest revs, but overall, it's more than flexible enough to allow for laziness when overtaking and a leisurely ride at low revs (where it's also barely audible). The difference over the 1,6-liter engine is especially noticeable on the highway, where the 1,6-liter engine had to shift at least a low gear for moderate acceleration, while the TCe accelerates calmly and quickly enough even in top gear.

At the higher price, the engine consumes at least some of the time: in our test, it consumed 7,6 liters per hundred kilometers. Consumption easily rises even above nine liters, but also drops to six. The heavier the right leg, the more the wallet will suffer. For comparison: in 2009, the five-door Megane 1.6 16V in our test had an average consumption of 8,7 liters. A good liter of difference? Well, it's not exactly a quarter like the factory data difference, but the low-mileage 50 kilometers outweighs most of those thousand euros of the higher TCe price - and otherwise, let's say, a more comfortable ride.

But still: it is a pity that Renault is not more decisive: 1,6 outside, TCe 115 at the same price inside.

Text: Dušan Lukič, photo: Aleš Pavletič

Renault Megane Sedan TCe 115 Энергия Dynamique

Basic data

Technical information

engine:	4-cylinder - 4-stroke - in-line - turbocharged petrol - displacement 1.198 cm3 - maximum power 85 kW (115 hp) at 4.500 rpm - maximum torque 190 Nm at 2.000 rpm.
Energy transfer:	front wheel drive engine - 6-speed manual transmission - tires 215/45 / R17 W (Continental ContiSportContact 2).
Capacity:	190 km/h top speed - 0-100 km/h acceleration in 10,9 s - fuel consumption (ECE) 6,4/4,6/5,3 l/100 km, CO2 emissions 119 g/km.
Mass:	empty vehicle 1.205 kg - permissible gross weight 1.774 kg.
External dimensions:	length 4.312 mm – width 1.804 mm – height 1.200 mm – wheelbase 2.640 mm – trunk 377–1.025 60 l – fuel tank XNUMX l.

Our measurements

T = 21 ° C / p = 1.113 mbar / rel. vl. = 36% / odometer status: 3.618 km
Acceleration 0-100km:	11,1s
402m from the city:	17,8s
Flexibility 50-90km / h:	9,2 / 11,3s (IV/V)
Flexibility 80-120km / h:	11,5 / 13,4s (Sun./Fri.)
Maximum speed:	190km / h (WE.)
test consumption:	7,6 l / 100km
Braking distance at 100 km / h:	40,7m
AM table:	40m

evaluation

• Megane also stays Megane with TCe engine - only to be better than Megane with them. Forget about 1.6 16V and "squeeze out" the seller for a price difference of up to 115 TCe!

We praise and reproach

consumption

quite good sound insulation

rich equipment

in addition to cruise control, it also has a speed limiter

poor (slow and “confusing”) Tom Tom navigation

price compared to 1.6 16V

transparency back