Renault Dokker vs Lada Largus Cross: specs side by side
Quick comparison from catalog data - no editorial review of this pair yet.
Renault · 2012–2021
Dokker
- Power
- 85 kW116 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- -
Photo: RL GNZLZ from Chile / Wikimedia Commons, CC BY-SA 2.0
Lada · 2015–present
Largus Cross
- Power
- 77 kW105 PS
- 0–100 km/h
- 13.5 s
Photo: Throwawayacc222 / Wikimedia Commons, CC0
In plain words
Renault Dokker has more power: 85 kW (116 PS) against 77 kW (105 PS) for Lada Largus Cross. Renault Dokker is the older design (from 2012); Lada Largus Cross arrived in 2015. Lada Largus Cross is still in production; Renault Dokker is not. Our catalog has no 0–100 km/h for the Renault Dokker yet, so some checks above leave it out.
Size and weight
| Dokker | Largus Cross | |
|---|---|---|
| Fuel tank | 50 l13.2 gal US | 50 l13.2 gal US |
Difference vs Dokker (±).
Full specifications
| Renault Dokker | Lada Largus Cross | |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Version | 85 kW (116 PS) | 1.6 · 77 kW (105 PS) |
| Production years | 2012–2021 | 2015–present |
| Body | Minivan / MPV, Van | Station wagon |
| Class | Van | No data |
| Country | France | No data |
| Performance | ||
| Power Why it matters: More power means stronger acceleration and easier overtaking, especially with a full load. | 85 kW (116 PS) 114 hp Better | 77 kW (105 PS) 103 hp |
| Power, all versions | 55–97 kW (75–132 PS) 74–130 hp | 77–78 kW (105–106 PS) 103–105 hp |
| Torque Why it matters: Torque is the pulling force you feel when accelerating from low revs, towing or climbing hills. | 190 Nm 140 lb-ft | No data |
| 0–100 km/h Why it matters: A shorter 0–100 km/h time means quicker getaways and safer merging onto fast roads. | No data | 13.5 s |
| Engine and transmission | ||
| Fuel | No data | Petrol |
| Engine | No data | 1,600 cc · 4 cyl 1.6 l |
| Drive | Front-wheel drive | All-wheel drive |
| Dimensions and weight | ||
| Length | No data | 4,470 mm 176.0 in |
| Height | No data | 1,682 mm 66.2 in |
| Wheelbase | No data | 2,905 mm 114.4 in |
| Boot Why it matters: A bigger boot fits more luggage, shopping or a pram. | No data | 560 l 19.8 cu ft |
| Fuel tank Why it matters: A larger tank means more distance between fuel stops. | 50 l 13.2 gal US | 50 l 13.2 gal US |
| Economy and running costs | ||
| Fuel consumption Why it matters: Lower consumption cuts running costs and CO₂ emissions on every trip. | No data | 9.0 l/100 km 26.1 mpg US |
| Fuel cost per year | No data | €2,360/year estimated |
| Range on a full tank | No data | 556 km 345 mi estimated |
These cars do not differ in the data we have.
Equal rows hidden (1): Fuel tank.
Better marks the stronger figure - only for measurable specs (power, torque, 0–100 km/h, consumption, boot, weight).
Estimated at 15,000 km a year with fuel at €1.75/l petrol.