Renault Laguna II Grandtour
Car comparison
Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V TurbovsRenault Laguna III 2.0 dCi FAP
Compare specs, acceleration, fuel consumption, dimensions, practicality, and estimated running costs side by side.
New comparisonRenault Laguna III
2.0 dCi FAP
Comparison overview
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Best choices
Renault Laguna III 2.0 dCi FAP
- Quickest 0-100 km/h8.5 s
- Most powerful178 hp133 kW
- Highest torque400 Nm295 lb-ft
- Lowest city consumption8.6 L/100 km27.4 mpg US32.8 mpg UK
- Lowest highway consumption5.5 L/100 km42.8 mpg US51.4 mpg UK
- Best performance score47/100
- Best economy score89/100
Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V Turbo
- Fastest top speed220 km/h137 mph
- Lightest1,355 kg2,987 lb
- Best power-to-weight125 hp/t94 kW/t8.0 kg/hp
- Largest trunk475 L
- Best overall score57/100
- Best practicality score83/100
Specification comparison
| Model | RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP |
|---|---|---|
| Power | 170hp127kW | 178hp133kW |
| Torque | 270Nm199lb-ft | 400Nm295lb-ft |
| Curb weight | 1,355kg2,987lb | 1,539kg3,393lb |
| Gross weight | 1,985kg4,376lb | 2,089kg4,605lb |
| Top speed | 220 km/h 137 mph | 218 km/h 135 mph |
| To 99% top speed | 76.6s99% target: 218 km/h / 135 mph Calculated | 93.4s99% target: 216 km/h / 134 mph Calculated |
| 0-100 km/h | 8.6s | 8.5s |
| 0-200 km/h | 37.9s Calculated | 45.0s Calculated |
| 0-60 mph | 8.2s Calculated | 8.0s Calculated |
| Fuel consumption | - | 6.5L/100 km36.2mpg US43.5mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption city | 11.7L/100 km20.1mpg US24.1mpg UK | 8.6L/100 km27.4mpg US32.8mpg UK |
| Fuel consumption highway | 6.6L/100 km35.6mpg US42.8mpg UK | 5.5L/100 km42.8mpg US51.4mpg UK |
| Quarter mile | 16.3s Calculated | 16.2s Calculated |
| Power-to-weight | 125hp/t94kW/t57hp/1000 lb Calculated | 116hp/t86kW/t52hp/1000 lb Calculated |
| Torque-to-weight | 199Nm/t133lb-ft/ton Calculated | 260Nm/t174lb-ft/ton Calculated |
| Estimated range | - | 1,015km631mi Calculated |
| Displacement | 1,998cc122cu in | 1,995cc122cu in |
| Length | 4,695mm185in | 4,695mm185in |
| Width | 1,772mm70in | 1,811mm71in |
| Height | 1,443mm57in | 1,445mm57in |
| Wheelbase | 2,740mm108in | 2,756mm109in |
| Front track | 1,525mm60in | 1,557mm61in |
| Rear track | 1,480mm58in | 1,512mm60in |
| Ground clearance | - | 120mm5in |
| Trunk volume | 475L | 450L |
| Max trunk volume | 1,500L | 1,377L |
| Doors | 5 | 5 |
| Seats | 5 | 5 |
| Fuel tank | 70L | 66L |
Performance charts
Use the estimates as comparison hints and verify exact figures before making decisions.
Dyno simulation
Estimated stock-style power and torque curves by engine speed.
- Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V Turbo: Power / Torque
- Renault Laguna III 2.0 dCi FAP: Power / Torque
| Vehicle | Peak power RPM | Peak torque RPM | Max engine speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | 5,000 rpm | 3,250 rpm | 5,250 rpm |
| RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP | 3,750 rpm | 2,000 rpm | 4,000 rpm |
Acceleration curve
Estimated speed over time for selected vehicles.
| Metric | RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP |
|---|---|---|
| Acceleration checkpoints | ||
0-60 mph 0-97 km/h | 8.2 s | 8.0 s |
0-100 km/h 0-62 mph | 8.6 s | 8.5 s |
0-200 km/h 0-124 mph | 37.9 s | 45.0 s |
| Top speed | 220 km/h 137 mph | 218 km/h 135 mph |
| Drag race simulation | ||
60 ft 18 m | 2.8 s | 2.6 s |
330 ft 101 m | 7.3 s | 7.0 s |
1/8 mile 201 m | 10.8 s | 10.5 s |
1000 ft 305 m | 13.8 s | 13.6 s |
1/4 mile 402 m | 16.3 s | 16.2 s |
Trap speed 1/4 mile 402 m | 146 km/h 91 mph | 142 km/h 88 mph |
Power comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power. Higher is better · hp / kW
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | 170 hp 127 kW |
| RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP | 178 hp 133 kW |
Renault Laguna III 2.0 dCi FAP has 8 hp more than Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V Turbo.
The biggest power difference is between Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V Turbo and Renault Laguna III 2.0 dCi FAP: 8 hp (6 kW).
Torque comparison
Bar comparison chart for Torque. Higher is better · Nm / lb-ft
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | 270 Nm 199 lb-ft |
| RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft |
Curb weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Curb weight. Lower is better · kg / lb
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | 1,355 kg 2,987 lb |
| RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP | 1,539 kg 3,393 lb |
Top speed without limiter comparison
Bar comparison chart for Top speed without limiter. Higher is better · km/h / mph
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | 220 km/h 137 mph |
| RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP | 218 km/h 135 mph |
0-100 km/h comparison
Bar comparison chart for 0-100 km/h. Lower is better · seconds
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | 8.6 s |
| RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP | 8.5 s |
The biggest 0-100 km/h difference is between Renault Laguna III 2.0 dCi FAP and Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V Turbo: 0.1 s.
Power-to-weight comparison
Bar comparison chart for Power-to-weight. Higher is better · hp/t / kW/t
| Vehicle | Value |
|---|---|
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | 125 hp/t 94 kW/t 8.0 kg/hp |
| RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP | 116 hp/t 86 kW/t 8.6 kg/hp |
Performance spider chart
Radar chart comparing normalized performance and fuel-consumption scores.
| Vehicle | Power | Acceleration | Top speed |
|---|---|---|---|
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | 170 hp 127 kW | 8.6 s | 220 km/h 137 mph |
| RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP | 178 hp 133 kW | 8.5 s | 218 km/h 135 mph |
Most attractive quadrant
Scatter chart with performance score on the X axis and practicality score on the Y axis.
| Vehicle | Performance score | Practicality score | ||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo |
|
| ||||||||||||||
| RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP |
|
| ||||||||||||||
Detailed score breakdown
| Vehicle | RenaultLaguna II Grandtour2.0 i 16V Turbo | RenaultLaguna III2.0 dCi FAP | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power | 170 hp 127 kW | 178 hp 133 kW | ||||||||||||||||
| Torque | 270 Nm 199 lb-ft | 400 Nm 295 lb-ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Acceleration | 8.6 s | 8.5 s | ||||||||||||||||
| Top speed | 220 km/h 137 mph | 218 km/h 135 mph | ||||||||||||||||
| Lightness | 1,355 kg 2,987 lb | 1,539 kg 3,393 lb | ||||||||||||||||
| Fuel consumption | - | 6.5 L/100 km 36.2 mpg US 43.5 mpg UK | ||||||||||||||||
| Practicality |
|
| ||||||||||||||||
| Range score | - | 1,015 km 631 mi | ||||||||||||||||
| Trunk score | 475 L 16.8 cu ft | 450 L 15.9 cu ft | ||||||||||||||||
| Power-to-weight score | 125 hp/t 94 kW/t 8.0 kg/hp | 116 hp/t 86 kW/t 8.6 kg/hp | ||||||||||||||||
| Overall | Fixed score | Fixed score |
Fuel cost and annual usage
Estimate running costs from combined consumption, your annual distance, and the fuel price in your local currency.
Enter the fuel price in your local currency, for example €/L, $/gal, £/L or any other local currency.
LC = Local Currency
| Vehicle | Renault Laguna III 2.0 dCi FAP |
|---|---|
| Consumption | 6.5 L/100 km36.2 mpg US43.5 mpg UK |
| Cost / 100 km | 11.38 LC100 km |
| Cost / 100 mi | 18.31 LC100 mi |
| Annual fuel used | 975 L258 US gal214 UK gal |
| Annual fuel cost | 1,706 LC/year |
Head-to-head comparisons
Renault Laguna II Grandtour 2.0 i 16V Turbo
- Is 184 kg lighter
- Has 2 km/h (1 mph) higher top speed
- Has 10 hp/t better power-to-weight
- Has 25 L more trunk volume
Pros
- Highest top speed
- Lightest
- Best power-to-weight ratio
- Largest trunk
Cons
- Slowest 0-100 km/h
- Lowest power
Renault Laguna III 2.0 dCi FAP
- Has 8 hp more
- Has 130 Nm more
- Is 0.1 s quicker from 0-100 km/h
Pros
- Quickest 0-100 km/h in this comparison
- Most powerful
- Highest torque
Cons
- Heaviest
- Lowest top speed
- Smallest trunk
Choose cars to compare
Popular comparisons























