Renault Grand Scenic
Range-topping seven-seat people carrier driven
WE tested the ever-so-slightly more popular five-seat version of Renault’s all-new Scenic in Issue 1,439, and now it’s the turn of the £1,400 more expensive seven-seat Grand Scenic. We’re trying it for the first time in range-topping dci 160 guise, with the electronic dual clutch (EDC) automatic box, to see if it’s worth cancelling that Citroen Grand C4 Picasso order.
The Grand Scenic is all about extra length – all 228mm of it, to be exact. Only 70mm of that goes into the wheelbase; the rest extends the rear overhang. You can guess the benefits: either an extra pair of seats that sprout from the boot floor, or 596 litres of load capacity if you fold them down electrically using the (optional) buttons in the boot or via the touchscreen. Lay down all five rear seats, and you’re left with a typically van-like luggage area.
As a result, the Grand Scenic loses a little of its smaller stablemate’s pert profile, thanks to a squared-off, angular rear end. It’s perhaps not quite as neatly proportioned, but it’s just as head-turning – especially in our car’s sky-blue paint.
As with the regular Scenic, every model is fitted with massive 20-inch alloy wheels whether you like it or not. Form over function, you say? Possibly, but at least Renault has worked to ensure the tyres are a similar width and profile – and cost a similar amount to replace – as typical 17-inch rims.
Identical
Sitting in the front, you’ve got no chance of telling whether you’ve gone ‘Grand’ unless you look in the rear-view mirror. The dash is identical to the Scenic’s, and while it’s far less distinctive to look at than the exterior, it’s still smart and feels more substantial than models of old. Our top-spec car has the prominent 8.7-inch touchscreen, giving you central access to most of the MPV’S functions; apart from the odd pause as you use it, the system is good. It’s already featurepacked, but buyers will have to wait until early 2017 before Apple Carplay and Android Auto connectivity is added to the range.
There’s also the same wealth of storage areas, although the centre console bin oddly slides back further in the five-seat Scenic. This sliding central cabinet features two compartments with a total of 13 litres of space, plus you can pull it back to reveal two cup-holders, USB connections and a 12V socket. The glovebox also slides out like a filing cabinet, while the front seats hide more storage boxes. It means the Scenic is as good as the Grand C4 Picasso at holding all the mess that family life brings.
That slightly longer wheelbase benefits second-row passengers, with enough legroom for six-footers to get comfortable. The
“In both Scenic and Grand Scenic, the diesels are expected to make up the lion’s share of sales”
rearmost seats feel tighter on space than in a Grand C4 Picasso, as does the access through the back door, but you can slide the middle row forward to boost legroom.
The Grand Scenic is around 120kg heavier than the Scenic. You’d expect that to translate into a much less enjoyable driving experience, but in reality you only feel the difference when pushing the car hard, which few MPV owners ever will.
Even so, it’s much less of a blunt instrument than the old Scenic, with sharp turn-in and not too much body roll in normal cornering. The ride is still on the fidgety side, though, so we’ll have to wait until we can drive it on more demanding, UK roads for a more detailed assessment.
We tried the more powerful petrol option in the Scenic, but in both models the diesels are expected to make up the lion’s share of sales. With 380Nm of torque, you might expect this dci 160 to feel more urgent than it actually does. Part of that is down to the extra weight, but the auto box’s fairly sluggish responses don’t help.
Take things at a lesser pace, and the engine and transmission feel more cohesive, though. The manual gearbox might be a bit notchy, but it’s probably the better bet for most. The engine itself is refined and smooth around town, and starts to get raucous only once past 3,000rpm. That’s a relatively small price to pay for a decent estimated 60mpg – no worse than the lesser-powered dci 130. Even so, we’d recommend considering the cheaper variants, which are just as talented but simply won’t hit the pocket as hard.