Hi,
I'm in the process of replacing my car and need an economical car with a large boot. I have just been looking at the stats on the 1.5 Dci (106) Scenic/Grand Scenic and it could fit the bill.
Most of my driving is motorway driving (40,000 miles pa) at a steady 70-75MPH. The fuel economy that the Scenic offers ON PAPER seem terrific, what are they actually like on the motorway? What consumpton do you guys actually get?
Also, is the 1.5 accpetable on the motorway?
I am coming from a BMW 320d so I do expect a drop in performance.
Many thanks.
|
|
In the bigger and heavier Scenic, the 1.9 or 2.0 diesels are better. If finances will allow, the 2.0 is the best engine. 1.5 works well in other models but a bit lame in the Scenic.
|
|
The scenic with the 1.9 dci and above is a delight. The scenic with the 1.5 dci is pathetic. Its dog slow and because you have to work it hard you loose all that MPG advantage.
|
So what will the MPG differences likely to be on the motorway between the 1.5 and 2.0 diesel engines?
Finances will permit either engine, I was just looking at the economy figures, quite important when you spend over £300/month on fuel.
Thanks.
|
I don't know anything about the 1.5 engine but one thing you should are hopefully aware of is that the Scenic is one of the most discounted cars there are via brokers, e.g., £15,642 for the 7-seater 2.0 dci Privilege compared to a list price of £21,415. If you're not getting £5k off I'd keep looking until you are.
I'd like to think that no one pays list but I did hear of one person on this site who (claimed to have) paid over £23k for one.
Incidentally, the on-paper difference between the 106 bhp and 150 bhp engines is only 5.3 mpg, which at 92ppl translates to £336 pa or £6.47 per week even at your high mileage. I suspect that the economy advantage may be less than that in the real world but even if it's not, I wouldn't call it a massive difference financially.
|
|
|
|
Absolutely agree with the others - go for the bigger engine, which will be working less hard, especially at motorway speeds. The 1.9 130 bhp will do the job very well and in all probability more economically than the 1.5 : the 2.0 148 bhp will use a bit more fuel but not that much - but there will be not too much of a drop in performance from the 320d.
There's now a Grand Scenic with a 5-seat option - should have a huge boot. Of conventional medium estates the Mondeo and Octavia have the biggest boots, unless you go up a size to a Volvo V70. The V50 is much smaller.
Renault reliability is very dependent on finding a good dealer, so be careful.
|
At 75-80mph, there will be no difference in fuel consumption between the 1.5 106bhp and the 2.0 150bhp.
|
|
Another advantage of the 2.0 is that being a newer design and so clean, it doesn't need a FAP (Particulate filter).
|
I have the 1.9dci in a Scenic and on long motorway journeys, I only get about 42-43mpg, this is based on sitting between 75-80. If I go to 60, the average goes up to the high 40's.
I have been very disappointed in the fuel consumption as the same engine in the Lagunas seems to give high 40s if not early 50s. Other than consumption, engine is great, good pull and relaxed 6th gear.
If you get the choice, I would steer clear of the sunroofs as they do quite abit of creaking especially in the extremes of temperature.
|
|
I concur with the BobbyG's figures, mpg isn't that great unless you really try (feathering the throttle). Other things to watch with the Scenic is the terrible quality of the interior - both our front seats have cracks in the front seat bolsters at 30K miles and other trim is literally falling off.
|
|
A long time ago,one of the major motor mags ran tests on four different makes of cars where the same model was available with different engines and checked the consumption under different driving conditions.The only condition where the smaller motor was better on any of the vehicles was in heavy traffic.
|
|
|
|
I suspect aerodynamcis has a lot to do with it. The Laguna is sleek, the Scenic resembles a brick in comparison.
I read somewhere that Renault were going to phase out both the 1.9 and the 2.2 now the fabulous 2.0 is here. It makes no sense for all three engines to still be in the range, the the 2.0 is a great engine, developed jointly with Nissan.
|
|
|
|
|
:no_upscale():format(webp)/https://cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/81f824b30231a4108e2c7570448210e8/9288ecd21d90efeedfb288d27152d63e.jpg)
:no_upscale():format(webp)/https://cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/5f6e6ad473871cad639c1f6cd9753671/def65272c052bab566421110132a38a7.jpg)
:no_upscale():format(webp)/https://cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/02b82ab878dc04673be1fb2737aeb981/28851f34afdf08117a26b55ce270a6ea.jpg)
:no_upscale():format(webp)/https://cdn.uk.prod.group-mobility-trader.com/images/cas/367b368d16462fa6a7e3ef9b3986a4ee/9930e401d8c9d0031c04ef48cf0695e3.jpg)
