Volkswagen T-Cross vs Renault Kadjar

What's the difference?

The Volkswagen T-Cross might be late to the small SUV party, but it’s not so much tardy, as making a fashionable entrance.

It’s a very impressive compact SUV - big on space, style and comfort, well priced, decently specified and a smart option for customers who aspire to a German badge being shown off in their driveway.

The Renault Kadjar Intens ticks a lot of the urban boxes. It’s small, which is good for navigating narrow city streets and parking in tight spaces, but it’s also spacious and practical. The Kadjar is fuel efficient for a four-cylinder petrol engine and it has that sophisticated French styling.

The Intens is expensive, though, and unless you absolutely have to have leather seats, a glass roof, and the Bose stereo I’d go for the mid-range Zen grade and save yourself $5K but still have all the same safety tech. That said the Intens has auto parking as standard which is a nice convenience for the city.

Safety could be better. The AEB system doesn’t have pedestrian and cyclist detection, rear cross traffic alert, or reverse emergency braking.

Finally, the dual-clutch automatic and 1.3-litre turbo-petrol engine while a fuel efficient combination, isn’t all that easy to live with and can make driving a less-than-smooth experience. The Nissan Qashqai’s combination of CVT auto and four-cylinder naturally aspirated engine is better suited to the urban jungle - something to think about there. 

Now the scores, the Kadjar Intens gets the same mark for daily driving and its urban talents – it could be smoother to drive, but there’s still lots to like. 

It’s not to be confused with the slightly larger T-Roc model, which has just arrived here too. The T-Roc is bigger, based on the Golf. But that model isn’t quite as clever when it comes to its design as this one.

Despite being smaller, the T-Cross is super smart when it comes to overall packaging. It’s based on the Polo city car, and isn’t much bigger in terms of nose-to-tail length (T-Cross: 4108mm; Polo: 4053mm). However the T-Cross is a taller, boxier design, and that means added practicality. It is 1760mm wide and 1583mm tall, whereas the Polo is 1751mm wide and 1446mm tall.

It still has the rugged SUV styling cues you’d expect, albeit in a bit more of an urban-focused design. There are still chunky bumpers and off road inspired bits to separate it from a standard city hatchback, and it has 180mm of ground clearance - ideal for jumping the occasional gutter.

And because it’s a VW sold in Australia, there are option packs to add on if you want them. The test car you see in these images has the R-Line pack optioned up, which adds a number of body design changes and 18-inch wheels on the outside, and some nice bits inside, too. More on that in the next section.

Disappointingly, VW has launched the T-Cross with a base model that still has halogen headlamps, where the mid-spec car you see here has LED lighting all around. I’ll break down the specs for you in the pricing section. 

People talk about French design being good. Well if you want to see just how good take a look at the Nissan Qashqai, because the Kadjar is fundamentally the same SUV with Renault’s design spin applied.

Yep, as I mentioned about 15 seconds ago, Renault and Nissan are part of an alliance that allows them to share the same cars, but each brand has room to ‘make it their own’ with styling that delivers a very different look, inside and out.

Now, the Qashqai is not an ugly car, but I think the Kadjar is more stylish and premium looking in the same way the larger Renault Koleos SUV is gorgeous compared to the relatively straight-laced Nissan X-Trail it’s based on.

There’s no doubt the Kadjar is a Renault thanks to the giant diamond logo on the plunging grille. I like the way the front bumper rises up into the bonnet like it’s all one piece, but I’m not completely sold on the rear of the car which looks a bit like its shirt is tucked into the back of its pants, which makes no sense unless you look at the images.

Still, the tail-lights have a prestige feel and the Kadjar model name spelled out across the tailgate is a confident statement, also adopted recently by other brands such as Volkswagen (T-Cross) and Ford (Puma).  

Telling the Intens apart from the other two grades is fairly easy, it has 19-inch wheels (the others have 17-inch rims), there’s the enormous glass roof, and it also has a chrome effect on the front and rear bumpers, side skirts, and around the fog lights. It’s a more premium look.

That higher-end feel goes into the cabin as well with the Intens’ black leather upholstery and colourful ambient lighting. The touchscreen is tiny, though, and there isn’t a great deal inside that you don’t get in the entry-grade Kadjar’s cabin, which is also almost as stylish.

The Kadjar is classified as a small SUV, which means nothing really when it comes to wondering if it’s going to fit in your garage or in the tiny parking spaces we’re faced with in the city.

So, I’ve mapped it out for you. The Kadjar’s dimensions are, 4449mm long, 2058 mm across (including the wing mirrors), and 1612mm tall. 

Another interesting thing – each B-pillar is adorned with a little French flag. I’m not sure if they're a sign of Gallic national pride or to remind everybody that meets the Kadjar that Renaults are French.

Either way, you don’t see this type of thing on other cars and for many buyers the appeal of a Renault is having a car that’s not like everybody else’s.

There are some SUVs in this segment of the market that pack more in than you think is physically possible. The Honda HR-V comes to mind first and foremost, and the T-Cross is very close to that benchmark-setter when it comes to interior practicality.

That’s because the T-Cross has a clever sliding second-row seat that allows you to either prioritise back seat room, or boot capacity. Depending on what you’re doing, you can adjust the space ratio to suit.

The sliding second-row means the boot capacity can either be 385 litres (seat all the way back) or 455L (seat forward), and that increases to 1281L with the seats folded flat, too. Under the boot floor is a space saver spare wheel, and those rear seats fold 60:40 as well.

With that back seat in its most passenger-focused setting, and with the driver’s seat set for myself (182cm), I had easily enough knee room, toe space and headroom to be comfortable for hours in the back. With it slid forward, that wasn’t the case - but it’s arguably only going to be used like that if you have younger children in boosters or baby capsules, anyway. 

Either way, it’s a good compromise, one that many competitors can’t offer. Not even the HR-V (though it has Magic Seats which are amazing in their own right).

The back seat amenities are a mixed bag. There are two USB ports for keeping devices charged up, as well as a pair of map pockets on the seat backs, and a pair of large door pockets. Unlike some more expensive VW models, those pockets aren’t lined, though, and that’s a bit annoying as things will move around in them, as they’re not shaped for bottles. 

There are no cup holders, no fold-down armrest, and no rear ceiling-mount grab handles. So it really depends what you prioritise when it comes to the back seat experience.

The front cabin is very familiar to those who have sat in a VW over, say, the past five years. It’s a well designed and very ergonomically smart space, with everything falling to hand just as you’d expect.

The media screen is excellent - an 8.0-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android auto, but not sat nav as standard (optional). There are knobs and buttons on either side, so it’s easy to find your way around the screen, and the menus are logical, too. 

Storage includes a pair of small cup holders between the front seats, a covered centre bin, a decent glovebox, and a storage tray on the dash top. There’s also a storage caddy in front of the gear selector, which houses a wireless phone charger pad, and also two more USB ports. And just like the rear, the front door pockets are large but unlined, though at least up front you get padded elbow pads on the doors.

The steering wheel is lovely, and the optional pack with the upgraded sound system and digital driver info screen is worth the money, if you ask me. It adds to that technical, Teutonic feeling that you get in VW products, and helps align the interior nicely to the already excellent standard of perceived quality - even if there are plenty of hard plastics used.

The Kadjar is a big-small SUV, in that it’s longer than many in the same segment at 4.4m with a wheelbase of more than 2.6m, which means more space inside for people and their stuff.

That said, don’t expect limousine legroom, but at 191cm (6'3") tall, I can sit behind my driving position with my knees only just touching the front seat back, which is pretty darn good for a small SUV.

Making life a bit more comfortable back there, too, are directional air vents, two USB charging ports and a 12V power outlet. There are another two USB ports and a 12V up front, too.

Cabin storage is okay. The door pockets in the back are big enough for a 500ml bottle, while there are larger ones in the front, along with two cupholders and another circular hole, which looks like it’s for coins, if anybody still uses those?

The centre console bin is pretty decent in size and so too is the boot which has a cargo capacity of 408 litres with all seats up and 1478 litres with the second row folded flat.

The Intens is the highest grade of Kadjar you can buy and has a list price of $37,990. As a point of reference, the entry-grade Kadjar with an automatic transmission is $29,990. So, what are you getting for an extra $8K?

Well, the entry-level Kadjar comes with a 7.0-inch touchscreen with Apple CarPlay and Android Auto, cloth seats, dual-zone climate control, privacy glass and 17-inch alloy wheels. The Intens gets 19-inch alloys, leather seats (heated up front), a seven-speaker Bose sound system, leather steering wheel, panoramic sunroof, as well as LED headlights and fog lights.

The Intens also comes standard with auto parking, and even the most determined DIY parkers will appreciate that in the city.

The Intens also has more advanced safety equipment than the entry-grade, although the same tech also comes on the mid-spec Zen for $32,990.

You may already know this, but the Kadjar and the Nissan Qashqai are essentially the same car. Renault and Nissan have an alliance which lets them share technology and as well as entire models.

So, you might want to compare the Kadjar Intens to a Qashqai Ti which lists for $38,790. Other models to check are the Mitsubishi ASX and Toyota C-HR.

Powering the VW T-Cross will be two different engines.

At launch, and in our test car, is the 85TSI petrol engine, a 1.0-litre three-cylinder turbo unit with 85kW of power (at 5000rpm) and 200Nm of torque (from 2000-3500rpm). It is teamed exclusively to a seven-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission, and only comes in front-wheel drive. It’s hardly fast, but can manage 0-100km/h in 9.9 seconds.

There’ll be a more powerful 110TSI motor soon. It has a 1.5-litre four-cylinder petrol-turbo with 110kW of power and 250Nm of torque. It also comes with a seven-speed dual-clutch auto and 2WD. It’s hardly a horsepower hero, but VW claims a 0-100km/h time of just 7.8sec for this variant. 

So that means there’s no diesel, no four-wheel drive (4WD or 4Motion), nor all-wheel drive (AWD), and no hybrid, plug-in hybrid or electric variant, either. 

The kerb weight for the 85TSI model is just 1240 kilograms, which is very light for a small SUV. The towing capacity is also a bit light, with an unbraked towing capacity of 630kg and a braked towing capacity of 1100kg.

While the Renault Kadjar and Nissan Qashqai are essentially the same car, they don’t share the same powertrain. The Kadjar has a smaller but more powerful engine – a 1.3-litre turbo-petrol four-cylinder making 117kW/260Nm.

Shifting gears is a seven-speed dual-clutch auto. There’s no manual available, and all Kadjars are front-wheel drive.

Frankly, the Qashqai four cylinder with less grunt and CVT are a smoother combination. The dual-clutch auto and turbo lag means power delivery and acceleration are delayed, while low-speed gear shifts can be jerky.

Claimed fuel consumption for the T-Cross 85TSI is 5.4 litres per 100 kilometres - the claim is perhaps a little ambitious, as is often the case with Euro three-cylinder petrol engines.

But it does have start-stop technology and brake energy recuperation, and during my time in the T-Cross I’ve seen a return of 6.4L/100km across a mix of urban and country driving, as well as some long highway stints. 

Renault says after a combination of open and urban roads the Kadjar will have used 6.3L/100km. In my own testing I measured 6.5L/100km at the fuel pump. That’s outstanding.

The T-Cross drives like a Volkswagen. That might sound like a pretty obvious assertion, but the fact of the matter is that the German brand has a certain feel to the way its cars drive, and this little teeny weeny SUV drives rather similarly to some of the other members of the VW family, including much larger models.

That's one of the things I like most about the T-Cross. It drives bigger than it is. That means it feels substantial and considered on the road, not light (even though it is, at 1240kg) or small (though it is) and it doesn't feel like it'll get pushed around on the open road either.

Truly - I did more than 600 kilometres in the T-Cross, including a lot of highway and open road testing, and it feels substantial, refined and well resolved, which is something you can't necessarily say about a lot of its small SUV competitors. 

It's impressive, but it isn't perfect.

The engine is good and offers a nice whoosh of midrange pulling power, but in stop-start traffic the throttle response - in combination with the dual-clutch auto and start-stop engine tech - can make for some frustratingly slow take-offs. 

As speeds rise, it's a more enjoyable drive. The transmission shifts smoothly and smartly, and the engine response is ample, though up steeper hills you might wish for a touch more grunt, and the good news is the 110TSI model coming soon is bound to appease that desire.

The steering is nicely weighted and offers decent feel to the driver's hands, and you're never left second-guessing what will happen next. 

The suspension is quite well sorted, though my test car's 18-inch alloy wheels and low profile tyres (Hankook Ventus Prime 215/45/18s) were a little sharp over less-than-perfect urban streets. It still rides well and copes with big lumps and bumps decently, but it can be a little jittery - though arguably any small SUV on 18s will have a similar criticism levelled at it. 

Renault’s Kadjar may be a better-looking version of Nissan’s Qashqai, but it doesn’t drive as well. This comes down to the engine and transmission Renault has gone with.

There’s turbo lag with that small four-cylinder and this delay is made more pronounced by a dual-clutch transmission that causes the vehicle to lurch during shifts.

This type of shemozzle is not uncommon, the Ford Puma and Nissan Juke behave in the same way with their similar powertrains.

There’s nothing wrong with them, it’s just that for a car that’s probably going to spend its life mainly in the city, the Kadjar won’t provide the smoothest driving experience.

The Qashqai has a CVT automatic and while these transmission aren’t as sporty feeling as a dual-clutch, they’re smooth and good for easy city driving.

The Kadjar does have a comfortable ride and good handling, so if you’re able to get used to the antics of the engine and transmission there’s more to like than not about the way this Renault drives.

The Kadjar hasn’t been given an ANCAP safety rating, but it did score the maximum five stars when tested by its European equivalent Euro NCAP in 2015.

But beware, the Kadjar isn’t equipped with much in the way of advanced safety equipment. Yes, there is AEB on all grades, while the mid-spec Zen and top-of-the-range Intens come with blind spot monitoring and lane departure warning. But that’s about it. No lane keeping assist, or rear cross traffic alert, or adaptive cruise.

There are front and rear parking sensors, which are almost vital in the city, and a reversing camera.

It’s for this reason the score here is so low – charging $38K and not having anywhere near the level of safety tech on a new car that costs much less is disappointing.

For child seats there are three top tether anchor points across the second row and two ISOFIX points.

Under the boot floor is a space saver spare wheel.

VW Australia backs its models with a five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty plan, which is equal to the majority of mainstream players in the market.

There’s also a couple of new service plans available, aimed at lowering the cost of ownership.

At the time of writing, the pricing for the brand’s “Care Plans” were pegged at $990 for three years/45,000km, or $1800 for five years/75,000km cover (VW says the first service is free).

If you compare that to the brand’s pay as you go offer (Assured Price Service), you’ll save $256 for three years, or $645 if you get the five-year plan. It’s well worth considering rolling into your finance plan. 

There’s one year of roadside assist cover included for new VW products, but if you maintain your car with the brand, it renews up to nine further times, allowing 10 years of roadside cover.

The Kadjar is covered by Renault’s five-year/unlimited kilometre warranty.

Service intervals are every 12 months or 30,000km and capped at $399 for the first three services, followed by $789 for the fourth then back to $399.

There’s also up to five years roadside assistance, if you service your Kadjar with Renault.