Citroen C-Crosser 2007 vs BMW X3 2006
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.4 Petrol | 2.5 Petrol | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 170 HP | 218 HP | |
| Torque: | 232 NM | 250 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 10.8 seconds | 8.9 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is a more dynamic driving. Citroen C-Crosser engine produces 48 HP less power than BMW X3, whereas torque is 18 NM less than BMW X3. Due to the lower power, Citroen C-Crosser reaches 100 km/h speed 1.9 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 9.3 | 9.5 | |
| Citroen C-Crosser consumes 0.2 litres less fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that by driving the Citroen C-Crosser over 15,000 km in a year you can save 30 litres of fuel. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 640 km in combined cycle | 700 km in combined cycle | |
| 800 km on highway | 900 km on highway | ||
| BMW X3 gets more mileage on one fuel tank. | |||
Drive type | |||
| Wheel drive type: | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | All wheel drive (AWD, 4x4) | |
| Ground clearance: | 174 mm (6.9 inches) | 201 mm (7.9 inches) | |
| Because of the higher ground clearance, BMW X3 can perform better on bad roads - it can go over higher obstacles and bumps. At the same time, the higher ground clearance can reduce stability and handling on paved roads, especially at higher speeds. | |||
Engines | |||
| Engine production duration: | 18 years | 7 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4007 | Installed on at least 3 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW Z4 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. | |||
| Hydraulic tappets: | no | yes | |
| The BMW X3 engine has hydraulic tappets (lifters), providing quieter operation and no need for periodic adjustment, but they are more complex in design and can cause serious engine damage in case of failure. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.67 m | 1.67 m | |
| Citroen C-Crosser is 8 cm longer than the BMW X3, 4 cm narrower the height of the cars does not differ significantly. | |||
| Seats: | 7 seats | no data | |
| Trunk capacity: | 184 litres | 480 litres | |
| Trunk capacity with 7 seats: | 184 litres | no data | |
| Trunk capacity with 5 seats: | 441 litres | 480 litres | |
| Trunk max capacity: with rear seats folded down |
1686 litres | 1560 litres | |
| In 5-seat version BMW X3 has more luggage space (by 39 litres). The maximum boot capacity (with all rear seats folded down) is larger in Citroen C-Crosser (by 126 litres). | |||
| Turning diameter: | 12 meters | 12 meters | |
| Gross weight (kg): | 2`410 | 2`300 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C-Crosser has
|
BMW X3 has
| |