Citroen C-Crosser 2007 vs BMW X3 2007
| Gearbox: | Automatic | Automatic | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Engine: | 2.2 Diesel | 2.0 Diesel | |
| Camshaft drive: | Timing chain and belt | Timing chain | |
Performance | |||
| Power: | 156 HP | 177 HP | |
| Torque: | 380 NM | 350 NM | |
| Acceleration 0-100 km/h: | 12.5 seconds | 9.2 seconds | |
|
BMW X3 is a more dynamic driving. Citroen C-Crosser engine produces 21 HP less power than BMW X3, but torque is 30 NM more than BMW X3. Due to the lower power, Citroen C-Crosser reaches 100 km/h speed 3.3 seconds later. | |||
Fuel consumption | |||
| Fuel consumption (l/100km): | 7.2 | 6.7 | |
| Real fuel consumption: | 8.2 l/100km | 8.0 l/100km | |
|
The BMW X3 is a better choice when it comes to fuel economy. By specification Citroen C-Crosser consumes 0.5 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3, which means that if you drive 15,000 km in a year, the Citroen C-Crosser could require 75 litres more fuel. By comparing actual fuel consumption based on user reports, Citroen C-Crosser consumes 0.2 litres more fuel per 100 km than the BMW X3. | |||
| Fuel tank capacity: | 60 litres | 67 litres | |
| Full fuel tank distance: | 830 km in combined cycle | 1000 km in combined cycle | |
| 1000 km on highway | 1150 km on highway | ||
| 730 km with real consumption | 830 km with real consumption | ||
| 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 | |||
| Average engine lifespan: | 480'000 km | 350'000 km | |
| Engine resource depends largely on regular maintenance and the quality of the oils and fuels used, but under equal conditions the average life of a Citroen C-Crosser engine could be longer. | |||
| Engine production duration: | 6 years | 17 years | |
| Engine spread: | Installed on at least 2 other car models, including Mitsubishi Outlander, Peugeot 4007 | Installed on at least 6 other car models, including BMW 5 sērija, BMW 3 sērija, BMW 1 sērija, BMW X1 | |
| In general, the longer and for more car models an engine is produced, the better its serviceability and availability of spare parts. BMW X3 might be a better choice in this respect. | |||
Dimensions | |||
| Length: | 4.65 m | 4.57 m | |
| Width: | 1.81 m | 1.85 m | |
| Height: | 1.72 m | 1.67 m | |
| Citroen C-Crosser is 8 cm longer than the BMW X3, 4 cm narrower, while the height of Citroen C-Crosser is 5 cm higher. | |||
| 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`265 | |
| Safety: | no data | ||
| Quality: | no data | average | |
| Average price (€): | 6200 | 6800 | |
| Pros and Cons: |
Citroen C-Crosser has
|
BMW X3 has
| |