Real fuel consumption and economy logo

Renault Scenic 2006 fuel consumption

Renault Scenic from 2006 to 2009 real fuel consumption according to user reports is approximately 15% higher compared to advertised fuel consumption. For petrol engines real consumption is in average 13% higher, but for diesel engines is approximately 18% higher. Starting from 2006 Renault Scenic average difference between actual owner-reported fuel consumption and stated consumption was similar to average, at 2007 difference between owner-reported and advertised fuel economy became less than industry average. For more details, see the table below.

Year-to-year deviations of actual owner-reported average fuel consumption from advertised values

YearGasoline carsDiesel cars
All carmakersRenault ScenicAll carmakersRenault Scenic
2006+9%+6% +11%+12%
Show all years
2007+11%+6% +12%+12%
2008+12%+6% +13%+12%
2009+14%+6% +14%+12%

See below for the actual consumption of generations and versions of Renault Scenic.

2006 - 2009

Renault Scenic 2006 fuel economy

Average advertised fuel consumption for petrol engines29.7 MPG
7.9 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for petrol engines27.4 MPG
8.6 l/100km
Average real gasoline consumption difference *+6%
Average advertised fuel consumption for diesel engines39.0 MPG
6.0 l/100km
Average real-world fuel consumption for diesel engines35.1 MPG
6.7 l/100km
Average real diesel consumption difference *+11%

According to advertised fuel consumption, a Renault Scenic 2006 with automatic transmission consumes on average 0.8 liters per 100 km or 13% more fuel than similar versions with manual gearbox. Based on user-reported real-world fuel consumption, this generation Renault Scenic with automatic transmission consumes around 0.7 litres per 100 km or 10% more fuel than a version with the same engine but a manual gearbox.

Compared to similar cars from other manufacturers, the Renault Scenic fuel economy is slightly worse than average. The best real fuel economy in its class according to user reviews of all the modifications has modification with 2.0 petrol engine and manual transmission (Renault Scenic 2006 2.0 16V T 165 HP). However, of all modifications the best advertised fuel economy in its class has Renault Scenic with 2.0 diesel engine and manual transmission (Renault Scenic 2006 2.0 dCi 150 HP).

ModificationClaimed consumptionReal consumption
1.4 liter petrol engine
Renault Scenic 2006 1.4 16V 100 HP manual 32.7 MPG
7.2 l/100km
1.5 liter diesel engine
Renault Scenic 2006 1.5 dCi 85 Hp 85 HP manual 46.1 MPG
5.1 l/100km
42.0 MPG
5.6 l/100km+10%
Renault Scenic 2006 1.5 dCi 105 Hp 105 HP manual 45.2 MPG
5.2 l/100km
39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km+15%
1.6 liter petrol engine
Renault Scenic 2006 1.6 16V 110 HP manual 30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km
29.8 MPG
7.9 l/100km+4%
Renault Scenic 2006 1.6 16V Automatic 110 HP automatic 29.4 MPG
8.0 l/100km
28.7 MPG
8.2 l/100km+2%
1.9 liter diesel engine
Renault Scenic 2006 1.9 dCi 130 HP manual 39.2 MPG
6.0 l/100km
35.6 MPG
6.6 l/100km+10%
Renault Scenic 2006 1.9 dCi Automatic 130 HP automatic 33.1 MPG
7.1 l/100km
30.9 MPG
7.6 l/100km+7%
2.0 liter petrol engine
Renault Scenic 2006 2.0 16V 135 HP manual 29.4 MPG
8.0 l/100km
27.4 MPG
8.6 l/100km+8%
Renault Scenic 2006 2.0 16V Automatic 135 HP automatic 27.4 MPG
8.6 l/100km
24.2 MPG
9.7 l/100km+13%
Renault Scenic 2006 2.0 16V T 165 HP manual 29.0 MPG
8.1 l/100km
27.7 MPG
8.5 l/100km+5%
2.0 liter diesel engine
Renault Scenic 2006 2.0 dCi 150 HP manual 40.6 MPG
5.8 l/100km
33.6 MPG
7.0 l/100km+21%
Renault Scenic 2006 2.0 dCi Automatic 150 HP automatic 33.6 MPG
7.0 l/100km
31.8 MPG
7.4 l/100km+6%

* - Difference between advertised and user reported fuel economy has been calculated taking into account only those car versions for which information is available both on the fuel consumption specified by the manufacturer and reported by users.

User-reported fuel consumption may not accurately represent all users' experiences due to variables such as driving conditions, driving style, technical condition of the vehicle, and other circumstances. Thus, it should not be relied upon as a representative indicator.